
Class. 
Book. 



SMITHSONIAN DEPOSIT 



^16 6 



MARYLAND'S 



INFLUENCE IN FOUNDING A 



National Commonwealth. 



k 



r^ 



SFunJi -'^ubttcation, '^o. 1 1. 



MARYLAND'S 

INFLUENCE IN FOUNDING A 

National Commonwealth, 

OR THE 

History of the Accession of Public Lands 

By the Old Confedeeation, 




A Paper read before the Maryland Historical Soci 



A.pril a, 1877. 
B Y 

HERBERT B. ADAMS, Ph. D., 

FEtLOw IN History, Johns Hopkins University. 



|a}itmoii0, 1877, 



''The vacant lands are a favorite object to Maryland." 

M^a)i80jsr, 

On the plan for a general revenue, 1783. 

"There is nothing which hinds one country or one 
State to another hut interest." 

Wjl8HI]<[aiOJ<f, 

On the Potomac Scheme for Opening a Channel 
of Trade belween East and West, 17S5. 

"There is no truth more thoroughly established, 
than that there exists in the economy and course of 
nature an indissoluble union between virtue and 
happiness, between duly and advanta(/e, between the 
genuine maxims of an honest and magnanimous 
policy, and the solid re-wards of public prosperity and 

felicity." 

wji8Hij^aTon, 

Inaugural Address, 1780. 



i'kinted by john murphy, 
riuntkh to the maryland historical society, 
Baltimore, 1877. 






MARYLAND'S INFLUENCE 



Founding a National Commonwealtli. 



THE claims of England to the lands immedi- 
ately west of the Alleghany mountains and 
to the region north-west of the Ohio river, 
were successfidly vindicated in the French and 
Indian War. By the treaty of Paris, in 1763, 
the English became the acknowledged masters, 
not only of the disj^uted lands back of their set- 
tlements, but of Canada and of the entire Western 
country as far as the Mississippi river. This was 
the first curtailment of Louisiana, that vast inland 
region, over which France had extended her claims 
by virtue of explorations from Canada to the Gulf 
of Mexico. Although now restricted by the treaty 
of Paris to the comparatively unknown territory 
beyond the Mississippi, Louisiana was destined to 
undergo still further diminution, and, like Vir- 
ginia, which was once a geographical term for 
half a continent, to become finally a state of defi- 
nite limits and historic character. Ceded by 



6 



Frnncc to Spain, at the close of the above-men- 
tioiu'd war, in compensation fur h)sses sustained 
by tlie I'ltter in aidinji- France against Enghmd, 
and ceded back again to France in 1800, through 
the influence of Napoleon, these lands beyond the 
Mississii)pi were purchased by our Government 
of the First Consul in 1803, and out of the south- 
eastern portion of the so-called " Louisiana Pur- 
chase," that State ^ was created, in 1812, which 
perpetuates the name of Louis XIV., as Virginia 
does the fame of a virgin queen. 

But it is not with Louisiana or the Louisiana 
Purchase that we are especially concerned in this 
paper. We have to do with a still earlier acces- 
sion of national territory, with those lands which 
were separated from French dominion by conquest 
and by the treaty of Paris, and, more especially, 
with that triangular region east of the Missis- 
sippi, south of the Great Lakes, and north-west 
of the Ohio, for here, as w^e shall see, w^as estab- 
lished the first territorial commonwealth of the 
old Confederation, and that too through the etfec- 
tive influence and far-sighted policy of Maryland 



1 The final outcome of French dominion in this country is Louisiana, 
with its French inheritance of Roman Law. Having i)assed of late years 
through many corrupt phases of prsetorian, proconsular, and dictatorial 
government, it was perhaps an historic necessity that she should revive 
the Roman theory of sovereignty, as did Louis XIV., by the aid of his 
court-lawyers, and reassert la puissance souveraine d'une republique and 
Vetat c^est moi, in the form of an enlightened absolutism of its sovereign 
people. 



in opposing the grasping land claims of Virginia 
and three of the IVorthern States. The history of 
the accession of those public lands which are best 
known to Americans as the North-west Territory, 
and the constitutional importance of that accession 
as a basis of permanent union for thirteen loosely 
confederated States, and as a field for republican 
expansion under the sovereign control of Congress, 
may be presented under three general heads : 

1. The land claims of Virginia, Massachusetts, 
Connecticut, and A^ew York. 

2. The influence of Maryland in securing a 
general cession of western territory for the pub- 
lic good. 

3. The origin of our territorial government and 
the true basis of national sovereignty. 



I. The Land Claims. 

Having indicated the historic place and terri- 
torial situation of the western lands in question, 
we shall now turn to the specific claims of Vir- 
ginia, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and jN'ew York, 
the only States, which after the separation of the 
colonies from the mother country, had any legal 
title to lands north-west of the Ohio. 

The charter granted by James I. to South Vir- 
ginia, in 1609, was the most comprehensive of all 



8 



the colonial charters, for it embraced the entire 
north-west and, within certain limits, all the 
islands along the coast of the South Sea. It is 
not A'ery surprising that the ideas and language 
of the privy council should have been somewhat 
hazy as to the exact whereabouts of the South 
Sea, for Stith,^ one of the early historians of 
Virginia, tells us that in 1608, wdien the London 
Company were soliciting their patent, an expedi- 
tion was organized under Captain JS^ewport to sail 
up the James river and find a passage to the South 
Sea. Captain John Smith also was once commis- 
sioned to seek a new route to China by ascending 
the Chickahominy ! This charter of 1609 is the 
only one which we shall cite in this paper, for 
it was especially against the enormous claims of 
Virginia that Maryland raised so just and effec- 
tive a protest. The following is the grant : 

"All those lands, countries and territories situate, 
lying and being in that part of America called 
Virginia, from the point of land called Cape or 
Point Comfort, all along the sea-coast to the north- 
ward two hundred miles and from the said Point 
or Cape Comfort, all along the sea-coast to the 
south w^ard two hundred miles ; and all that space 
and circuit of land l3^ing from the sea-coast of the 
precinct aforesaid, up into the land throughout, 

1 Stitli's Uistory of the first discovery and settlement of Virginia. Re- 
])rinted fur J()s('i)h Siibin, 18tJ5, p. 77. 



9 



from sea to sea, west and north-west ; and also 
all the islands lying within one hundred miles 
along the coast of both seas of the precinct afore- 
said." ^ 

The extraordinary ambiguity of this grant of 
1609, which was always appealed to as a legal 
title by Virginia, was first shown by Thomas Paine, 
the great publicist of the American and French 
Revolutions, in a pamphlet called "Public Good,"^ 
written in 1780, and containing, as the author says 
upon his title page, "an investigation of the claims 
of Virginia to the vacant western territory, and of 
the right of the United States to the same ; with 
some outlines of a plan for laying out a new State, 
to be applied as a fund, for carrying on the war, 
or redeeming the national debt." Paine shows 
how the words of the charter of 1609 could be 
interpreted in different ways ; for example, the 
words " all along the sea-coast " might signify a 
straight line or the indented line of the coast. 
The chief ambiguity, however, lay in the inter- 
pretation of the words " up into the land through- 
out, from sea to sea, west and north-west." From 
which point was the north-west line to be drawn, 
from the point on the sea-coast two hundred miles 
above, or from the j)oint two hundred miles below 



1 Laws of the United States respecting the Public Lands, (Washing- 
ton, 1828.) p. 8L 

2 Works of Thomas Paine, I., p. 267. 



10 



Cape Comfort? The charter does not state dis- 
tinctly. The logical order of terms would imply 
that the lower point below Cape Comfort, should 
be taken as the starting point for the north- 
western line. In that case, Virginia would have 
a triangular boundary and a definite area some- 
thing larger than Pennsylvania. 




The more favorable interpretation for Virginia 
and, perhaps, in view of the expression " from sea 
to sea," more natural interpretation, was to draw 



11 



the north-western line from the point on the sea- 
coast two hundred miles above Point Comfort and 
the western line from the southern limit below 
Point Comfort. This gave Virginia the greater 
part, at least, of the entire north-west, for the 
lines diverged continually. 




W. 



12 



In 1624, the London Company was dissolved, 
and Virginia became a royal province, the Gov- 
ernor being appointed by the King, but the people 
electing a House of Burgesses. No alteration 
appears to have been made at that time in the 
boundaries established by the charter of 1609, 
but the northern limits of Virginia were after- 
w^ards curtailed by grants to Lord Baltimore and 
William Fenn, and the southern limits by a grant 
to the proprietors of Carolina.^ From a letter of 
Edmund Burke to the General Assembly of 'New 
York, for which province he was employed as 
agent, it is clear that, in questions concerning 
the boundary of royal provinces, it was the 
uniform doctrine and practice of the Lords Com- 
missioners for Trade and Plantations, to regard 
"no rule but the king's will."^ A royal procla- 
mation was issued in 1763, prohibiting colonial 
governors from granting patents for land beyond 
the sources of any of the rivers which flow 
into the Atlantic ocean from the west or north- 



iThe charter of Maryland was granted in 1632, and maj^ be found in 
Bacon's Laws of Maryland at Large, or in Hazard 1., p|). 327-3G. The 
charter of Pennsylvania bears the date of IGbl, and is contained in 
Proud's History of Pennsylvania, I., pp. 171-87. The original charter 
of Carolina, (1663,) for which Locke's famous constitution was written, 
is said to have been copied from the charter of Maryland. See Lucas' 
Charters of the Old English Colonies, London, 18-50, p. 97. 

2 Burke's letter, which is most interesting for its exposition of the Que- 
bec Bill of 1774, annexing to Canada the country north-west of the Ohio, 
was first published in the New York Historical Society Collection-, l!d 
Series, II., j)p. 219-25. 



13 



west/ Washington regarded this proclamation as 
a temporary expedient for quieting the minds of 
the Indians, and he proceeded therefore, with the 
greatest tranquillity, to seek out and survey good 
lands for future speculation.-^ 

But efforts were being made to establish a new 
colony back of Virginia. The so-called " Ohio 
Company" had been founded as early as 1748, by 
Thomas Lee, Lawrence Washington, Augustine 
Washington and others, for the colonization of the 
western country.'^ A c-rant had been obtained, from 
the crown, of five hundred thousand acres of land in 
the region of the Ohio, and the efforts of this com- 
pany to open up a road into the western valleys pre- 
cipitated the French and Indian war. Probably the 
proclamation of 1763 was partly designed to pacify 
the Indians by reserving for their use, under the 
sovereign protection of England, the lands back of 
the Alleghanies and beyond the Ohio, but schemes 
for a new government in that region were being- 
discussed in England as Avell as in America.^ 

In 1766, Benjamin Franklin'^ was laying plans 
for a second great land comjiany, which was 

1 This proclamation is to be found in the Land Laws of the United 
States, pp. 84-88 or in Franklin's Works, IV., p. 374, at the conclusion 
of his famous paper on "Ohio Settlement.'' 

2 See letter to Crawford, September 21, 1767. Sparks' Life and Writ- 
ings of Washington, II , p. 340. 

3 Sparks' Life and Writings of Washington, II., p. 479. 

•i A. pamphlet was published in London, in 1763, entitled "The Advan- 
tages of a settlement upon the Ohio in Murth America " 
SWorks of Franklin, IV., p. 233. 

3 



14 



iinally organized and called the Vandalia or AVal- 
pole Company. It was composed of thirty-two 
Americans and two Londoners. Benjamin Frank- 
lin was really the moving spirit in the enterprise, 
bnt he persuaded Thomas Walpole, a London 
hanker of eminence, to serve as the figure-head. 
The company petitioned, in 1769, for a grant of 
two and a half million acres of western land lying 
between the thirty-eighth and forty-second paral- 
lels of latitude and to the east of the river Scioto. 
Franklin was in London and labored hard with 
Cabinet officers and the Board of Trade for the 
success of Walpole's petition. It was urged that 
the company offered more for this grant than the 
whole region back of the mountains had cost the 
British Government, at the Treaty of Fort Stan- 
wix with the Indians, in 1768. The claims of the 
Ohio Company were also merged in this new 
scheme, but the report thereon was long delayed 
through the influence of Lord Hillsborough. A 
"new colony back of Virginia" was much talked 
of, however, about the year 1770. Lord Hills- 
borough himself had some correspondence that 
year with the Governor of Virginia on this sub- 
ject.^ From a letter of George Washington to 
Lord Botetourt, and from subsequent correspon- 
dence between Washington and Lord Dunmore, 
Botetourt's successor as Governor of Virginia, it 

iSee Works of Thomas Paine, I., 290. 



15 



is perfectly clear tliat a new and independent 
colony was in prospect back of the Alleglianies.^ 
Indeed, a rival scheme, under the name of the 
Mississippi Company, seems to have been organ- 
ized by gentlemen of Virginia, among Avhom 
Francis Lightfoot Lee, Richard Henry Lee, Ar- 
thur Lee, and George Washington were con- 
spicuous, but their petition, in 1769, for two and 
a half million acres of back land was never heard 
from after it had been referred to the Board of 
Trade.^ Walpole's petition, however, after a delay 
of three years, was, through the influence of Lord 
Hillsborough, unfavorably reported. Franklin 
immediately prepared an answer, which is said 
to be "one of the ablest tracts he ever penned,"* 
and in which he so utterly refuted the aro-uments 
of Lord Hillsborough that Walpole's petition was 
finally granted by the Crown, August 14, 1772. 
Lord Hillsborough was so mortified that he 
resigned his position as Cabinet Minister and 
President of the Board of Trade. 

In the Washington -Crawford correspondence, 
from 1772 to 1774, there are several allusions to 
the prospect of a "new government on the Ohio."^ 

1 Writings of Washington, II., pp. .S56, 360. 

2 See Plain Facts, Philadelphia, 1781, p. 69. 

SSparks' Life and Writings of Washington, II., p. 485. Franklin's 
paper, which is entitled " Ohio Settlement," may he found in his Works, 
IV., pp. 324-374. 

■iThe Washington-Crawford Letters concerning Western Lands. Ed- 
ited by C. W. Butterfield, (Cincinnati, Ptobert Clarke & Co., 1877,) pp. 
25, 30, 35. 



w 



AVasliiiigton, in a letter dated September 25, 
1773, desires to secure ten thousand acres of land 
as near as possible to "the western bounds of the 
new colony,"^ that is, just beyond the Scioto, and, 
in a Baltimore newspaper of that year, he adver- 
tises for sale twenty thousand acres of land on 
the Great Kanawha and Ohio rivers, observing 
that " if the scheme for establishing a new gov- 
ernment on the Ohio, in the manner talked of, 
should ever be eifected, these must be among the 
most valuable lands in it."-^ It Avas confidently 
expected, after the treaty between the Crown of 
Great Britain and the Indians, in 1768, at Fort 
Stanwix, that the lines of the colonies would be 
reextended beyond the Alleghany mountains, or, 
in other words, that the limits imposed by the 
royal proclamation of 1763 w^ould fall, but there 
is no evidence that this expectation was ever real- 
ized by any act of the King in council. It was 
rumored, indeed, at various times after Walpole's 
Grant had been secured, that " the new govern- 
ment on the Ohio " had fallen through and that 
Virginia was authorized to reassert her ancient 
charter boundaries, but these rumors aj^pear to 
have been false. The legal title of the Walpole 

1 Washington-Crawford Letters, p. 30. See also "Washington's letter 
to Dunmore, November 2, 1773. "Washington's "Writings, II., p. 378. 

2 Maryland Journal and the Baltimore Advertiser, August 20, 1773. 
A fac-simile of this number was reprinted last year (1876) by the Balti- 
more Anieriean. 



17 



Company was not, indeed, fully perfected when 
revolutionary troubles broke out, but it is evi- 
dent from a report in the Journals of Congress 
on the claims of this company, generally known 
as the Yandalia, that the King and council had 
really agreed to erect the region back of Virginia 
into a separate colony, and that the agreement 
w^as completed all but affixing the seals and pass- 
ing certain forms of office. While it was held, 
in the above report, that the allowance to a single 
company of such immense land claims, w^as incom- 
patible with the interests and policy of the United 
States, it was recommended that the American 
members of the Yandalia be reimbursed by Con- 
gress in distinct and separate land grants, for their 
share in the purchase of the above tract.^ 

The consideration with which the claims of the 
Yandalia are treated in this report, which dis- 
misses so summarily the pretensions of the Illinois 
and Wabash Companies, shows conclusively that 
there was some essence of right and legality in the 
original W^alpole grant. At all events, it was re- 
cognized before the Revolution as taking the prece- 
dence of Yirginia's claim to jurisdiction over the 
lands west of the Alleghanies. Lord Dunmore, 
in the summer of 1773, promised Washington's 
land agent to grant certain patents on the Ohio 

1 Journals of Congress, IV., p. 23. 



18 



in case the new (jovernment did not take place^^ and • 
in the fall of that year he wrote to Washington 
in the most positive terms : " I do not mean to 
grant any patents on the western waters, as I do 
not think I am at present empowered so to do."^ 
Lord Dunmore had, however, at some previous 
date, issued patents to \Yashington for above 
twenty thousand acres of land on the Great 
Kanawha and Ohio rivers, as we know from the 
hitter's advertisement, above mentioned, in the 
Maryland Journal and Baltimore Advertiser of 
August 20, 1773. The Cxovernor of Virginia had 
no jurisdiction outside of his own province, but 
he had the right to grant from the King's domain 
two hundred thousand acres, in bounty-lands, to 
officers and soldiers wdio had served in the French 
and Indian war, and who should personally apply to 
him for land-warrants : To every field officer, five 
thousand acres ; to every captain, three thousand ; 
to every subaltern or statf officer, two hundred ; 
and to every private soldier, fifty acres. These 
grants could be made in Canada or Florida, or 
in the so-called " Crown lands." The latter term 
was usually applied, after the proclamation of 
1763, to the lands back of the AUeghanies and 
beyond the Ohio. 

Private surveys in the above region had begun 
long before the time of Walpole's Grant, and the 

1 Washinsjton-Crawford Letters, p. 35. 

2 Writings of Washington, II., p. 379. 



19 



claims of officers and soldiers had, to some extent, 
been bought up by speculators. Washington and 
liis land agent, William Crawford, had been par- 
ticularly active in seeking out good tracts of land 
in the western country. As a tield officer, Wash- 
ington was entitled, under the proclamation, to 
five thousand acres of bounty-land, but there is 
positive evidence to show that he had surveys 
for over seventy thousand acres ; that he secured 
patents, in the names of officers and soldiers, for 
over sixty thousand, and that he himself was the 
owner of, at least, thirty-two thousand acres, wdiich 
he called " the cream of the country — the first 
choice of it." There is a charming frankness in 
Washington's statement to the Reverend John 
Witherspoon concerning these lands. " It is not 
reasonable to suppose," he says, " that those who 
had the first choice, [who] had five years allowed 
them to make it in and a large district to survey 
in, were inattentive to the quality of the soil or the 
advantasres of the situation."^ There was nothino- 
discreditable to Washington in his land specula- 
tions. We can only admire that far-sighted wis- 
dom which so early discerned the importance of 
the western country, and that practical sagacity 
which was as great in affairs of private enterprise 

1 Washington-Crawford Letters, p. 78. 'A strong light is thrown upon 
Washington's character by this correspondonce, but strong natures, liive 
his, bear strong light.* For documentary evidence on the subject of 
Washington's Land Speculations, see Appendix. 



20 



as it was afterwards in the aifairs of state. It 
is certain, moreover, that in his business under- 
takings, Washington contemphited " an extensive 
public benefit as well as private advantage,"^ for 
already before the Revolution, he had begun a 
correspondence relative to tlie importation of Ger- 
mans from the Palatinate to colonize his lands." 
Washington is the prototype of that public spirit 
and private enterprise which are so characteristic 
of Americans, and which, after all, constitute the 
life-principle of the American Republic. While 
investigating the nature of those material inter- 
ests out of which the American Union was devel- 
oped, it is not improper to glance thus, in passing, 
at the worldly characteristics of the Father of his 
Country. This question of land-claims is so inter- 
w^oven with land-grants and land-speculations, 
both private and public, that it is necessary, for a 
proper understanding of the subject, to trace out, 
here and there, lines of individual conduct and the 
threads of personal motive. 

It is uncertain when Lord Dunmore^ iirst began 
to issue patents for the bounty-lands. We know 
that he must have patented upwards of twenty 

iSee letter to Crawford about the Salt Springs, Washington-Crawford 
Letters, p. 31, or A])i)endix to this paper. 

2Soe Writings of Washington, II., pp 382-7. 

3 That Lord Dunniore patented Washington's land is evident from the 
latter's own statements. See Washington-Crawford Letters, p. 77. For 
the relation between Lord Dunn ore and Washington, and for the former's 
interest in looking over the ground before granting furtlier pati'iits, see 
A)ipeiidix. 



21 



thousand acres for Washington, as early as July, 
1773, for we find Washington's advertisement of 
the same, bearing the date of the 15th of July. 
Washington speaks of these lands as " among the 
first which have been surveyed." In the Mary- 
land Gazette for March 10, 1774, may be found an 
official notice, dated January 27, 1774, directing 
gentlemen, officers, and soldiers, who claimed land 
under the proclamation of the 7th of October, 1763, 
and who had obtained warrants from the Earl of 
Dunmore, to appear in person or by agent, at the 
mouth of the Great Kanawha, on the 11th of 
April, and have their lands officially surveyed. 
The land-agents and surveyors, who went down 
the Kanawha upon the above errand, were 
stopped, or, as some say, attacked by Indians, 
and the hostilities which ensued brought on the 
bloody conflict of 1774, known as Lord Dun- 
more's War, which was waged by the Virginians 
against the Shawanese and Mingoes. This war 
may be regarded as the foundation of Virginia's 
militar}^ title to the lands back of the Allegha- 
nies. Legal title she had not. The rumor which 
had been industriously circulated in January, 
1774,^ to the efl^ect that the "new government" 
had fallen through, w^as without foundation. 
Lord Dunmore appears to have issued most of 
his patents in 1774, and to have made a violent 

1 Wsi.-liini^toii-Crawfoi'd Letters, p. 4 '. 

4 



90 



effort, in tlic spring of that year, to assert the 
jurisdiction of Mrginia over tlie entire region 
beyond the mountains. The attempt was made 
by Connolly, the agent of Lord Dunmore, to 
usurp authority even over territory which had 
formerly belonged to Pennsylvania. Connolly 
sought, but without success, to enforce the militia 
laws of Alrginia in the county of Westmore- 
land, and to secure the country around Pitts- 
burgh for the province of Lord Dunmore. But 
the conquest of the back-lands was soon effected 
by Virginia, and possession made her title good. 
Conquest and possession became accomplished 
facts, and against such there is no law. 

By Act of Parliament, in 1774, the Crown lands 
north-Avest of the Ohio were annexed to the royal 
province of Quebec. It was the so-called Quebec 
Bill,' which was referred to in the Declaration of 
Independence as one of " their acts of pretended 
legislation.'' The King was denounced "for abol- 
ishing the free system of English laws in a neigh- 
boring province, establishing therein an arbitrary 
government, and enlarging its boundaries." All 
the American colonies felt themselves more or less 
aggrieved b}" the Quebec Bill, for lands which had 
been rescued from the French by the united efforts 
of Great Britain and America were now severed 



1 Tliis document is reprinted in the Eeport of the Regents of the Uni- 
veisity on the Boundaries of the State of New York, pp. 'JU-92. 



23 



from their natural connection with the settlements 
of the sea-board, and formed into a vast inland 
province, like the ancient Louisiana of France. 
French law, moreover, was revived at Quebec 
and absolute rule seemed everywhere imminent. 
But the Declaration of Independence changed 
the relations of things. It was the general opinion 
in America, that " the Crown lands " were insepa- 
rable from colonial interests, and, that in case the 
war should be brought to a successful issue, those 
States having a legal title to the western country 
could assert jurisdiction over the territory which 
fell within their respective limits. At the out- 
break of the Revolution, Virginia had annexed 
the " County of Kentucky " to the Old Dominion, 
and, in 1778, after the capture of the military 
posts in the north-Avest by Colonel George Rogers 
Clarke,^ in a secret expedition undertaken by Vir- 
ginia at her own expense, that enterprising State 
proceeded to annex the lands beyond the Ohio, 
under the name of the County of Illinois. The 
military claims of Virginia were certainly very 
strong, but it was felt by the smaller States that 
an equitable consideration for the services of other 
colonies in defending the back country from the 
French, ought to induce Virginia to dispose of a 

1 For Clarke's own account of the Expedition, see Perkins' Annals of 
the West, (Cincinnati, 184fi,) pp. 204-210 Clarke's commission from 
Patrick Henry, then Governor of Virginia, may be found in Perkins, 
p. 184. 



24 



portion of her western territory for tlie common 
good. 

It is easy now to conceive how royal grants 
to Massachusetts and Connecticut of hinds stretch- 
ing from ocean to ocean, must have conflicted 
with the charter-claims and military title of Vir- 
ginia to the great north-west. We have seen 
that Virginia's charter could be extended over 
the entire reo'ion bevond the Ohio. It is not 
necessary to quote the original charters^ of Mas- 
sachusetts and Connecticut, for, told in brief, the 
former's claim embraced tlie lands which now lie 
in southern Michigan and Wisconsin, or, in other 
words, the region comj^rehended by the extension 
westward of her present southern boundary and 
of her ancient northern limit,- which was " the 
latitude of a league north of the inflow of Lake 
Wlnnipiseogee in New Hampshire." The western 
claims of Connecticut covered portions of Ohio, 
Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan. 



iThe claims of Massacluisctts were based upon the charter granted 
by "William and Mary, in 1691, and those of Connecticut upon the charter 
granted by Charles II. in 1662. These documents may be found in tlie 
Laws of the United States respecting the Public Lands, pp. 78, 80. 

2 This statement is from "Walker's Statistical Atlas of the United 
States, (Areas and Political Divisions, compiled by Mr. Stocking of the 
Patent Office.) The text of the original charter, although somewhat 
obscure, seems to imply that the northern limit of Massachusetts was 
three miles north of the head of the Merrimac river. Probably Mr. 
Stocking has some other source of information, for his work throughout 
is oxtrcinel}' well-done, being the most reliable and concise exposition we 
have seen of that complicated subject, the land cessions. 



25 



The chartered rights of 'New York were based 
upon the grant of 1664 to James, Duke of York, 
by his brother Charles 11.^ By an agreement 
originally made in 1683, the boundary between 
Connecticut and Xew York was fixed at a line 
twenty miles distant from the Hudson river. 
Massachusetts agreed, in 1773, to a continuation 
of the same line for her western limit." 

The extension of charter-boundaries over the 
far-west by Massachusetts and Connecticut, led 
to no trespass on the intervening charter-claimB 
of 'New York. Connecticut fell into a serious con- 
troversy, however, with Pennsylvania, in regard 
to the possession of certain lands in the northern 
part of the latter State, but the dispute, when 
brought before a court appointed by Congress, 
was finally decided in favor of Pennsylvania.^ 
But in the western country, Massachusetts and 
Connecticut^ were determined to assert their char- 
tered rights against Virginia and the treatf/-c\'Aims 
of New York, for, by virtue of various treaties 
with the Six Xations and allies, the latter State 
was asserting jurisdiction over the entire region 

1 See Report of tlie Regents of the University on the Boundaries of 
the State of New York, p. 11. 

2 See above Report, pp. 58, 212. 

3 January 3, 1783. See Journals of Congress, IV., p. 129, for these 
proceedings, which are important, as illustrating the position of the old 
Congress in arbitration. 

4 See Pica in Vindication of the Connecticut Title to contested lands 
west of New York. By Benjamin Trumbull, New Uaven, 1774. 



26 

between Lake Erie and the Cumberland moun- 
tains, or, in other words, Ohio and a portion of 
Kentucky/ These chiims were strengthened by 
the following facts : First, that the chartered 
rights of New York were merged in the Crown 
by the accession to the throne, in 1685, of the 
Duke of York as James II. ; again, that the Six 
JVations and tributaries had put themselves under 
the protection of England, and that they had 
always been treated by the Crown as appendant 
to the government of JVew York ; moreover, in 
the third place, the citizens of that State had 
borne the burden of protecting these Indians for 
over a hundred years. ^ New York was the great 
rival of Virginia in the strength and magnitude 
of her western claims. In fact, the chief interest 
of the great land-controversy turns upon the rival 
offers made to Congress by the tw^o States at the 
instance of Maryland. 

We have now in our mind's eye the conflict- 
ing claims of Virginia, Massachusetts, Connec- 
ticut, and New York to that vast region beyond 
the Ohio. We shall now consider, for a second 
topic, the process by which these various land- 
claims Mere placed upon a national basis, or, 
more specifically, 



iSoe Journals of Congress, IV, p. 21. Franklin's Works, IV. 
324-379. 

2. Journals of Compress, IV., p. 22. 



27 



II. The Influence of Maryland in Securing 
A General Cession of Western Territory 
FOR the Public Good. 

The immense importance of the region north- 
west of the Ohio as a som'ce of national revenue, 
when the tide of emigration shoiikl set in, was 
recognized as early as 1776. Silas Deane, the 
agent whom the Continental Congress had sent 
to France, addressed a communication^ to the 
Committee of Secret Correspondence, calling the 
attention of Congress to that triangular region 
described in general, by the Ohio, the Mississippi, 
and the parallel of Fort Detroit. " These three 
lines," he says, "of near one thousand miles each, 
include an immense territory, in a line climate, 
well watered, and, by accounts, exceedingly fertile. 
To this I ask your attention, as a resource amply 
adequate, under proper regulations, for defraying 
the whole expense of the war." 

The first move that was ever made in Congress 
towards the assertion of national sovereignty over 
this western country, was made by Maryland. On 
the 15th of October, 1777, exactly one month 
before the Articles of Confederation were pro- 
posed to the Legislatures for ratification, it was 
moved " that the United States in Congress assem- 

1 Diplomatic Correspondence, edited by Sparks, I., p. 79. 



28 



bled, shall have the sole and exclusive right and 
power to ascertain and fix the western boundary 
of such States as claim to the Mississippi or South 
Sea, and lay out the land beyond the boundary, so 
ascertained, into separate and independent States, 
from time to time, as the numbers and circum- 
stances of the people may require."^ Only Mary- 
land voted in the affirmative. But in this motion 
was suggested that idea of political expansion 
under the sovereign control of Congress, which 
ultimately prevailed and constituted, upon grounds 
of necessity, a truly National Republic. Xot only 
the suggestion of a firm and lasting union upon 
the basis of a territorial commonwealth, but the 
chief influence in founding such a union, must be 
ascribed to Maryland. And yet, strange to say, 
this priority of suggestion has never been noticed, 
and, stranger still, the constitutional importance 
to this country of Maryland's subsequent opposi- 
tion to the land-claims has wholly escaped atten- 
tion. 

The original proposition that Congress should 
exercise sovereign power over the western country 
was a pioneer thought, or, as the Germans say, a 
hahnhrechende Idee. We have discovered by a 
careful examination of the Journals of the Old 
Congress, that Maryland was not only the first, 
but for a long time the only State, to advocate 

1 Journals of Congress, II , p. -90. 



29 



national jurisdiction over the western lands. The 
opposition to the establishment of a public domain, 
under the sovereign control of Congress was so 
great, at the outset, that the States possessing 
land claims succeeded, a few days after Mary- 
land's motion, in adding a clause to the Ninth 
Article of the Confederation, to the eifect that no 
State should be deprived of territory for the benefit 
of the United States/ In the remonstrances to 
this grasping policy of the larger States, by Rhode 
Island, New Jersey, and Delaware, we shall find 
that there was no thought of investing Congress 
with the rights of sovereignty over the Crown 
lands. What these States desired was either a 
share in the revenues arising from the western 
country, or, that the funds accruing from the sale 
of western lands should be applied towards defray- 
ing the expenses of the war. But of the w^estern 
lands as the basis of republican expansion under 
the national jurisdiction of Congress, these States 
seemed to have no conception whatever. Rhode 
Island, in a proposed amendment to the Articles 
of Confederation, expressly declared that all lands 
within those States, the property of which before 
the war was vested in the Crown of Great Britain, 
should be disposed of for the benefit of the whole 
confederacy, " reserving, however, to the States 

iQctuber 27, 1777. Soc .lournals of Congress, IT., 304. 



30 



within whose limits siicli Crown hinds may be, 
the entire and complete jurisdiction thereof."^ 
JVew Jersey, in her remonstrance to the Ninth 
Article, while demanding that the Crown lands 
should be sold by Congress for defraying the 
expenses of the war, admits that, "The jurisdic- 
tion ought, in every instance, to belong to the 
res])cctive States within the charter or determined 
limits of which such lands may be seated.""^ Dela- 
ware also had a keen sense of the common inter- 
est of all the States in the sale of the unoccupied 
Avestern lands, but of that interest as the basis 
of a truly national commonwealth, she seems to 
have had no apj^reciation whatever.^ The credit of 
suggesting and successfully urging in Congress, 
that policy which has made this country a great 
national commonwealth, composed of " free, con- 
venient, and independent governments," bound 
together by ties of permanent territorial interests, 
the credit of originating this policy belongs to 
Maryland, and to her alone. Absolutely nothing- 
had been effected by Rhode Island, New Jersey, 
and Delaware, before they ratilied the Articles, 
towards breaking down the selfish claims of the 
larger States and placing the Confederation upon 
a national basis. Delaware, the last of all the 



1 Journals of Congress, II., p. GOl. 
2, Journals of Congress, II., p. COj. 
3 Journals of Congress, HI., ]>]). 201. 



31 



States, except Maryland, to ratify the Articles, 
acceded to the latter, JFebruary 22, 1779, under a 
mild protest, which Congress allowed to be placed 
on file, "provided," as was said, "it should never 
be considered as admitting any claim." ^ Mary- 
land was left to fight out the battle alone, and 
with what success we shall shortly see. 

The " Instructions " of Maryland to her dele- 
gates, which were read in Congress, May 21, 
1779, after the accession of Delaware, as above 
stated, forbidding them to ratify the Articles of 
Confederation before the land-claims had been 
placed upon a different basis, must be regarded as 
one of the most important documents in our early 
constitutional history, for it marks the point of 
departure for those congressional enactments of 
the 6th of September and 10th of October, 1780, 
which were followed by such vital results for the 
constitutional as well as the material development 
of this country. From the effect of these instruc- 
tions upon the acts and policy of Congress, we 
shall be able to trace out, from documentary evi- 
dence, that line of events which led to the great 
land-cessions of Virginia and New York, and to 
the Ordinance of 1784 for the government of the 
ceded territory, which Ordinance Avas termed " a 
charter of compact," the articles of which should 
stand as " fundamental constitutions" between the 

1 Juu nulls of Congress, III., p. 209. 



32 



tliirtoen original States and each of the new States 
therein described. The following brief citations 
from the original document will suffice to convey 
its tenor and spirit, and to indicate the attitude of 
Maryland towards the Confederation :^ 

"Although the pressure of immediate calami- 
ties, the dread of their continuance from the 
appearance of disunion, and some other peculiar 
circumstances, may have induced some States to 
accede to the present confederation, contrary to 
their own interests and judgments, it requires no 
great share of foresight to predict that when 
those causes cease to operate, the States which 
have thus acceded to the confederation will con- 
sider it no longer binding, and will eagerly 
embrace the first occasion of asserting their just 
rights and securing their independence. Is it 
possible that those States, who are ambitiously 
grasping at territories, to which, in our judg- 
ment, they have not the least shadow of exclusive 
right, will use with greater moderation the increase 
of wealth and power derived from those territo- 
ries, when acquired, than what they have dis- 
played in their endeavors to acquire them ? We 

think not Suppose, for instance, Virginia, 

indisputably possessed of the extensive and fertile 
country to which she has set up a claim, what 
would be the probable consequences to Mary- 

1 Juurnals of Coni^rcss, HI., p. 281. 



33 

land? .... Virginia, by selling on the most 
moderate terms, a small proportion of the lands 
in question, would draw into her treasury vast 
sums of money and .... would be enabled 
to lessen her taxes: lands comparatively cheap 
and taxes comparatively low, with the lands 
and taxes of an adjacent State, would quickly 
drain the State thus disadvantageously circum- 
stanced, of its most useful inhabitants, its wealth ; 
and its consequence, in the scale of the confede- 
rated States, would sink of course. A claim so 
injurious to more than one-half, if not the whole 
of the United States, ought to be supported by 
the clearest evidence of the right. Yet what evi- 
dences of that right have been produced? .... 
We are convinced, policy and justice require that 
a country unsettled at the commencement of this 
war, claimed by the British crown, and ceded to 
it by the treaty of Paris, if wrested from the com- 
mon enemy by the blood and treasure of the 
thirteen States, should be considered as a common 
property, subject to he parcelled out hy Congress into 
free, convenient and independent governments, in such 
manner and at such times as the wisdom of that 

assembly shall hereafter direct 

"We have spoken with freedom, as becomes 
freemen, and we sincerely wish that these our 
representations may make such an impression on 
that assembly [Congress] as to induce them to 



34 



make such addition to the articles of confedera- 
tion as may bring about a permanent union." ^ 

In connection with the above Instructions, which 
were passed by the Maryland legislature as early 
as December 15, 1778, was sent another docu- 
ment, bearing the same date, which was called a 
Declaration. The design was, as Ave know from 
the Instructions themselves, to bring the Declara- 
tion before Congress at once, to have it printed 
and generally distributed among the delegates of 
the other States. The Instructions Avere to be 
read, in the presence of Congress, at some later 
period, and formally entered upon the journals of 
that body. We find that the Declaration was 
really brought forward, by the Maryland dele- 
gates, on the sixth of January, 1779, but the con- 
sideration of the same w^as postponed, and the 
document itself does not appear in the journals. 
In Hening's Statutes of Virginia, however, among 
the papers relating to the Cession of North- 
Western Territory, this Declaration is to be found, 
side by side with the Maryland Instructions, and 
both immediately preceding the so-called "Vir- 
ginia Ilemonstrance," dated December 14, 1779, 
and an act of the New York legislature, of Feb- 
ruary 19, 1780, called "An act to facilitate the 
completion of the articles of confederation and 



1 The wliole of this important and interesting document is given in tlio 
A[ipcndix to tliis jiiipcr. 



35 

perpetual union, among the United States of 
America."^ As the hitter documents reveal the 
first practical results of Maryland's policy in 
opposing the land-claims, it is necessary to inves- 
tigate their origin. 

In May, 1779, the same month, it will be 
remembered, that the Maryland Instructions were 
read before Congress, the Virginia legislature 
passed an act for establishing a Land Office and 
for ascertaining the terms upon which land-grants 
should be issued.^ It was declared that vacant 
western territory, belonging to Virginia, should 
be sold at the rate of forty pounds for every 
hundred acres. In another act, passed about the 
same time, the patents issued to officers and sol- 
diers, under the proclamation of 1763, by any 
royal governor of Virginia, were declared valid, 
but all unpatented surveys were to be held null 
and void ; except in the case of settlers actually 
occupying lands to which no person had a legal 
title. Such settlers were to be allowed four hun- 
dred acres, on the condition of entering their 
claims at the Land Office. By such measures was 
Virginia proceeding to dispose of the western 
lands, to which Maryland had set up a claim in 
the interest of the United States. But Virginia 
was trespassing on the legal rights of the great 

iHening, Virginia Statutes at Large, X , pp. 549-Gl. 
2Hening, Virginia Statutes at Large, X., pp. 50-05. 



36 



land-companies, particularly upon the claims of 
the Yandalia to Walpole's Grant, ^vhich we have 
previously described. On the fourteenth of Sep- 
tember, 1779, a memorial was read to Congress, 
in behalf of the interests of Thomas Walpole and 
his associates. This memorial was referred to a 
committee on the eighth of October, and the favor- 
able report which was subsequently made upon 
the claims of American members of the Van- 
dalia Company has already been mentioned.' 
But, on the thirtieth of October, long before 
this committee had reported, the following re- 
solution was introduced by Mr. William Paca, 
of Maryland^ and seconded hy Ms colleague, Mr. 
George Plater: 

" Whereas, the appropriation of vacant lands 
by the several states during the continuance of 
the war will, in the opinion of Congress, be 
attended with great mischiefs ; therefore, 

Resolved, That it be earnestly recommended to 
the State of Virginia, to re-consider their late act 
of assembly for opening their land-office ; and that 
it be recommended to the said state, and all other 
states similarly circumstanced, to forbear settling 
or issuing warrants for unappropriated lands, or 
granting the same during the continuance of the 
present war."'" 

iSeep. 17. 

^Journals of Congress, III , p, 381. 



37 

This resolution was adopted, only Virginia and 
North Carolina voting in the negative. The New 
York delegates were divided. 

These steps bring us to the famous Remon- 
strance, which was addressed "by the General 
Assembly of Virginia to the delegates of the 
United American States in Congress assembled." 
The connecting link between the Maryland In- 
structions and Virginia's Remonstrance, is sup- 
plied by the above Resolution of Mr. Paca. Vir- 
ginia protests against the idea of Congress exercis- 
ing j?An*s(ZiV^'o/i, or any right of adjudication concern- 
ing the petitions of the Vandalia or Indiana land- 
companies, or upon ''any other matter,'' subversive 
of the internal policy of Virginia or any of the 
United States. But in this Remonstrance, Vir- 
ginia declares herself " ready to listen to any just 
and reasonable propositions for removing the 
ostensible causes of delay to the complete ratifica- 
tion of the confederation."^ The word ostensible 
is italicized in the original document and refers, 
of course, to Maryland, for this State was now 
the only one which had not ratified the Articles. 
Manifestly, the influence of Maryland was, at last, 
beginning to tell. It was the sturdy opposition of 
this State to the grasping ^ claims of Virginia and 

iHening, Virginia Statutes at Large, X., pp. 357-59. 

2 Virginians who object to this phrase are referred to the Writings of 
"Washington, TX., p. 33, where, in a letter to .Jeflferson, he says: "I am 
not less in sentiment with you respecting the impolicy of this State's 
grasping at more territory than they are competent to the government of." 

6 



38 



the larger States, which tirst awakened a readiness 
for compromise in the matter of hmd-ch^ims. 
Hening says Mar3dand ^^ insisted that the States, 
chximing these western territories, shonkl bring 
them into the common stock, for the benefit of 
the whole Union." ^ Howison, the most recent 
historian of Virginia, declares, that " Maryland 
was inflexible and refused to become a party [to 
the Confederation] until the claims of the States 
should be on a satisfactory basis." ^ 

The readiness of Virginia to do something to 
remove the ^^ ostensible cause ^^ of delay on Mary- 
land's part, indicates that her land-claims were 
becoming less positive. But the act of the legis- 
lature of New York " to facilitate the com2)letion 
of the Articles of Confederation," shows most 
decidedly that Maryland's cause was prevailing. 
The historic connection of this measure with the 
influence of Marvland deleo-ates in Cono-ress has 
never been shown, but from materials now acces- 
sible in a letter of General Schuyler, first published 
in 1873, in the Report of the Regents of the Univ- 
ersity on the Boundaries ot" the State of 'New York, 
we think this connection may fairly be demon- 
strated. General Schuyler was delegate to Con- 
gress from New York in 1779. On the 
twenty-ninth of January, 1780, he addressed a 

1 Ilening, Virginia Statutes at Large, X., p. 548. 

2 Howison, History of Virginia, II., p. 286. 



39 



letter from Albany, to the Xew York legislature, 
which oives us the kev to their act of the 
nineteenth of February. General Schuyler had 
been advocating in Congress a treaty with the 
Cayuga Indians. "Whilst the report of the com- 
mittee on the business I have alluded to," he 
says, " was under consideration, a memher moved, 
in substance, that the Commissioners for Indian 
Atfairs in the Northern Department should require 
from the Indians of the Six IS'ations, as a prelimi- 
nary Article, a cession of part of their country, 
and that the territory so to be ceded should be 
for the benefit of the United States in general 
and grantable by Congress." The first question 
is, who was this member? The policy recom- 
mended in the above motion is very suggestive 
of some Maryland delegate. On referring to the 
Journals of Congress for the above discussion, we 
find two motions on the subject mentioned by 
General Schuyler ; the first was made by Mr. 
Forbes of Maryland and seconded by Mr. Houston 
of New Jersey ; the other was made by Mr. Mar- 
chant of Rhode Island and seconded by Mr. Forbes. 
Both motions were defeated, but that which 
alarmed General Schuyler and of which he 
thought it necessary to unburden himself to his 
constituents, was simply this : "we had a few days 
after," he says, " a convincing proof that an idea 
prevailed that this and some other States ought 



40 



to be divested of part of their territory for the 
benefit of the United States, when a memher 
aftbrded us the perusal of a resolution, for which 
he intended, to move the House, purporting that 
all the lands within the limits of any of the 
United States, heretofore grantable by the king 
of Great Britain whilst these States (then Colo- 
nies) were in the dominion of that prince, and 
which had not been granted to individuals, should 
be considered as the joint property of the United 
States and disposed of by Congress for the benefit 
of the whole Confederacy." We have searched in 
vain for the above resolution in the Journals of 
Congress, although, from internal evidence, there 
is little doubt but that it came from the same 
source as the original motion, wiiich so alarmed 
General Schuyler. 

The chief importance which this letter to the 
New York legislature has for us, in this connec- 
tion, is the revelation it affords of the growing 
influence of the Mar3dand policy in Congress. 
General Schuyler confesses that the opposition to 
the original motion [of Mr. Forbes] was chiefly 
based upon the inexpediency of such an assertion 
of Congressional authority while endeavoring to 
secure a reconciliation with the Indians. In pri- 
vate conversation, the General had ascertained 
that certain gentlemen, who represented States in 
the same circumstances as New York in the 



41 



matter of land-claims, were inclined to support 
the resolution in its new form. It was urged by 
the friends of the proposed resolution, that a 
reasonable limitation of the land-claims would 
prevent controversy " and remove the obstacle which 
prevented the completion of the Confederation^ Gen- 
eral Schuyler says he endeavored, with great 
discretion, to ascertain the idea of the advocates 
of this measure as to what would constitute a 
reasonable limitation of the claims. " This they 
gave," he says, " by exhibiting a map of the 
country, on which they drew a line from the 
north-west corner of Pennsylvania (which in that 
map was laid down as on Lake Erie) through the 
strait that leads to Ontario and through that Lake 
and down the St. Lawrence to the forty-tifth 
degree of latitude, for the bounds of the State 
in that quarter. Virginia, the two Carolinas, and 
Georgia, they proposed to restrict by the Alle- 
ghany Mountains, or at farthest by the Ohio, to 
where that river enters the Mississippi and by the 
latter river to the south bounds of Georgia — That 
all the Territory to the w^est of these limits should 
become the property of the Confederacy. We 
found this matter had been in contemplation some 
time, the delegates from North Carolina having 
then already requested instructions from their 
constituents on the subject, and my colleagues 
were in sentiment with me that it should be hum- 



42 



bly submitted to the Legislature, if it would not 
be i^roper to communicate their pleasure in the 
premises by way of instruction to their servants 
in Congress." Such were the appeals of congress- 
men to their constituents before national interests 
were fully recognized and before National Gov- 
ernment was developed from grounds of necessity. 
But this letter clearly indicates the influence of 
the ^Maryland idea and the growth of a truly 
national sentiment in Congress, which was destined 
to find expression in that famous resolution of 
the sixth of September, 1780, wherein a general 
land-cession was first recommended to the States 
holding title to Avestern territory. 

It will be seen upon examination of the proceed- 
ings of the New York legislature,^ that this letter 
from General Schuyler was the immediate occasion 
of the passage of an act by the Senate and 
Assembly of that State, called " An act to fiicilitate 
the completion of the articles of confederation 
and perpetual union among the United States of 
America." In this act, which was passed the 
nineteenth of February, 1780, New York author- 
ized her delegates in Congress to make either an 
unreserved or a limited cession of her western 
lands according as these delegates should deem it 



1 Rpprintcd in full in the Eeport of the Regents of the University on 
the Boundaries of the State of New York, pp. 141-149. For the act 
itself see Journals of Congress, 111., p. 682. 



43 

expedient. This act was read in Congress on the 
seventh of March. 

On the sixth of September, 1780, a memorable 
date in the history of the land-question, a report 
was made on the Maryland Instructions, the Vir- 
ginia Remonstrance, and the above Act of the N^ew 
York legislature. Although this report did not 
recommend an examination of the points at issue 
between Maryland and Virginia, it did recommend 
a liberal cession of western lands by all states 
which laid claim to such possessions. " It appears 
more advisable," said the committee, " to press 
upon those states which can remove the embarrass- 
ments respecting the western country, a liberal 
surrender of a portion of their territorial claims, 
since they cannot be preserved entire without 
endangering the stahilify of the general confed- 
eracy ; to remind them how indispensably neces- 
sary it is to establish the federal union on a fixed and 
permanent basis, and on principles acceptable to all 
its respective members; how essential to public 
credit and confidence, to the support of our army, 
to our tranquility at home, our reputation abroad, 
to our very existence as a free, sovereign and 
independent people ; that they are fully persuaded 
the wisdom of the respective legislatures will lead 
them to a full and impartial consideration of a 
subject so interesting to the United States, and 
so necessary to the happy establishment of the federal 



44 



union; that they are confirmed in these expecta- 
tions by a review of the before-mentioned act of 
the legislature of JVevv York, submitted to their 
consideration ; that this act is expressly calculated 
to accelerate the Federal alliance, by removing, 
as far as depends on that state, the impediment 
arising from the western country, and for that 
purpose to yield up a portion of territorial claim 
for the general benefit ; Whereupon 

Resolved^ That copies of the several papers 
referred to the committee be transmitted, with a 
copy of the report, to the legislatures of the 
several states, and that it be earnestly recom- 
mended to those states, who have claims to the 
western country, to pass such laws, and give their 
delegates in Congress such powers as may effec- 
tually remove the only obstacle to a final ratification 
of the articles of confederation ; and that the legis- 
latiire of Maryland he earnestly requested to authorize 
their delegates in Congress to subscribe the said 
articles y^ 

But Maryland awaited some definite proposals 
from Virginia and the other states which laid 
claim to the western lands. Madison, in a letter 
of September 12, 1780, remarks with great sig- 
nificance, " As these exclusive claims formed the 
only obstacle with Maryland, there is no doubt 
that a compliance with this recommendation [of 

1 Journals of Congress, III., p. 516. 



45 



Congress] will bring her into the Confederation."^ 
Connecticut^ soon offered a cession of western 
lands, 2^rovided that she might retain the juris- 
diction. It is a remarkable fact that, at this 
period, Alexander Hamilton should have favored 
such a reservation by states ceding lands to the 
Confederation. In his proposals for constitutional 
reform, in a letter to James Duane, of New York, 
dated Sej^tember 3, 1780, he says that Congress 
should be invested with the whole or a portion of 
the western lands as a basis of future revenue, 
u fgservinf/ the jurisdiction to the States hy whom they 
are granted. ^'^ 

But the original idea of Maryland that the 
western country should " be parcelled out by Con- 
gress into free, convenient, and independent gov- 
ernments," was destined to prevail. On the tenth 

1 Madison Papers, p. 50. 

2 This oifcr was made October 10, 1780. The terms of the legislative 
act show conclusively that the Maryland Instructions were exercising 
their influence upon the country. "This Assembly taking into their 
consideration a liesolution of Congress of the 6th of September last, 
recommending to the several States which have vacant unappropriated 
Lands, lying within the Limits of their respective Charters and Claims, 
to adopt measures which may effectually remove the obstacle that prevents 
the ratijicati07i of the Articles of confederation, together with the Papers 
from the States of New York, Maryland and Virginia, which accom- 
panied the same, and being anxious for the accomplishment of an event 
most desirable and important to the Liberty and Independence of this 
rising Empire, will do everything in their power to facilitate the same 
notwithstanding the objections which they have to several parts of it. 
Resolved, etc. 

MS. Laws of Conn. First printed in Report of the Regents of the 
University on the Boundaries of the State of New York, p. 157 (1873.) 
•J Works of Uaniilton, I., p. 157. 

7 



46 



of October, it was resolved by Congress that those 
hinds which shouki be ceded in accordance with 
the recommendation of the sixth of September, 
shouki not only be disposed of for the benefit of 
the Confederation, but should be formed into 
distinct republican states, which should become 
members of the federal union and have the same 
rights of sovereignty as the other states.^ It was 
added, probably as an inducement to Virginia 
to cede her western lands, that Congress would 
reimburse any particular state for expenses 
incurred, since the commencement of the war, in 
subduing or defending any part of the western 
territory. The expedition of George Rogers 
Clarke, for the reduction of the north-western 
posts, had been undertaken by Virginia without 
aid from Congress or from the Continental army, 
and this fact had been urged by Virginia as a 
crowning title to the lands north-west of the Ohio. 
But Virginia seems to have acted upon the above 
recommendation of Congress, for by her act^ of the 
second of January, 1781, she oifered to cede to the 
Confederation complete jurisdiction over all lands 
north-west of the Ohio on certain conditions, the 
first of which, in regard to the disposition of 
territory and the formation of distinct republican 



1 Journals of Congress, III., p. 535. 

2Hening, Virginia Statutes at Large, X., p. 564, or Journals of 
Congress, IV., p. 206. 



47 



states, was taken almost verbatim from the above 
resolutions of Congress. 

Howison, the historian of Yirginia, admits that 
" this cession was made with the immediate 
design of inducing all the states to become parties 
to the Confederation " and " the effect of Virginia's 
offer," he asserts, " was in accordance with the 
hopes of its advocates, for Maryland became a 
party to the Confederation."^ If a desire to 
facilitate the completion of the union was indeed 
the motive of the proposed land cessions by New 
York and Virginia, as the language of their legis- 
lative acts certainly justifies us in supposing, then 
alone the attitude of Maryland towards the Con- 
federation must be regarded as a sufficient occasion 
for their action, for Maryland was the only state 
which had not ratified the Articles. The key- 
stone to the old Confederation was not laid until 
Maryland had virtually effected her object and 
secured the offer of land cessions to the United 
States from Virginia, as well as from New York 
and Connecticut. As Hildreth says of Maryland, 
" she made a determined stand, steadily refusing 
her assent to the Confederation, without some 
guarantee that the equitable right of the union to 
these western regions should be respected."^ 



1 Howison, History of Virginia, II., p. 282. 

2 Hildreth, History of the United States, III., p. 399. 



48 



We may doubt, however whether the action of 
Virginia, independent of the previous offer by 
New York, would have been sufficient to persuade 
Mar3dand to join the Confederation, for Virginia 
had attaclied such obnoxious conditions^ to lier 
proposed cession, that Congress as well as Mar}^- 
land were dissatisfied with the same. Virginia 
demanded, among other things, that Congress 
should guarantee to her the undisturbed pos- 
session of all lands south-east of the Ohio and 
that claims of other parties to the north-west 
territory should be annulled as infringing upon 
the chartered rights of Virginia, for, in making 
the proposed cession, Virginia evidently desired 
to put the Confederation under as heavy an 
obligation as possible. These conditions which 
Congress pronounced " incompatible v/ith the 
honor, interests and peace of the United States,"" 
led to an encouragement of the New York offer, 
which was formally made in Congress, March 1, 
1781. On that very day, Maryland ratified the 
Articles and the first legal union of the United 
States was complete. The coincidence in dates is 
too striking to admit of any other explanation 
than that Maryland and New York were acting 
with a mutual understanding. An act authorizing 
the delegates from JNIaryland to subscribe to the 

1. Journals of Congress, IV , p. 266. 
2 Journals of Congress, IV., p. 22. 



49 



Articles liad been read in Congress on the twelfth 
of February. This act had been passed by the 
legislature of that state ten days^ before indicating 
that the Virginia oifer, of January 2, had not been 
wholly without influence upon Maryland, although 
her delegates appear to have delayed .signing the 
Articles until the ^^ew York oifer had been fully 
secured and the land question had been placed 
upon a national basis. That Maryland was dis- 
satisfied with the partial and illiberal cession by 
Virginia is evident from the closing paragraph of 
the above mentioned act of her legislature. " It 
is hereby declared, that, by acceding to the said 
Confederation, this State doth not relinquish, or 
intend to relinquish any right or interest she hath, 
with the other united or confederated states, to 
the back country ; but claims the same as fully as 
was done by the legislature of this state, in their 
declaration which stands entered on the Journals 
of Congress." Maryland furthermore declared 
that no Article of the Confederation could or 
ought to bind her or any other state to guarantee 
jurisdiction over the back lands to any individual 
member of the confederacy.^ 

The oifer of Virginia, reserving to herself juris- 
diction over the County of Kentucky ; the oifer 



1 February 2, 1781. Journals of Congress, III., pp. 576-7. 

2 The Act of the Marj'h^nd Legislature authorizing their delegates to 
subscribe to the Articles of Confederation is re-printed in our Appendix. 



50 



of Connecticut, withholding jurisdiction over all 
her back lands; and the offer of New York, 
untrammeled by burdensome conditions and con- 
ferring upon Congress complete jurisdiction over 
her entire western territory, these three offers were 
now prominently before the country. The com- 
pletion of the union by Maryland had occasioned 
great rejoicing throughout the states and public 
sentiment was fast ripening for a truly national 
policy with reference to the disposal of the western 
lands. If we examine the Madison Papers and 
the Journals of Congress from this time onward 
to 1783 we shall find that congressional politics 
seem to turn upon three questions, (1,) finance, (2,) 
the disposal of the western lands, and (3,) the 
admission of Vermont into the union. We shall 
find that the question of providing for the public 
debt was inseparably connected with the sale of 
the western lands, and that the real reason why 
Vermont was excluded from the union until 1791, 
is to be sought for in the influence which the New 
York land cession exerted upon party feeling in 
Congress. These matters cannot be traced out 
here and we must briefly pass over the acceptance 
of the New York and Virginia cessions, which 
occasioned so much debate and controversy 
between the years 1781 and 1783. 

A committee that had been appointed by Con- 
gress to inquire into the claims of the different 



51 



states and land companies, reported May 1, 1782, 
in favor of accepting the offer of N'ew York, Avhich 
had been made ten months before, on the very day 
Maryland had formally acceded to the Confedera- 
tion. One of the chief reasons assigned by the 
above committee, why the offer of New York 
should be preferred to that of Virginia, was that 
Congress, by accepting the 'New York cession, 
would acquire jurisdiction^ over the whole western 
territory belonging to the Six Nations and their 
allies, whose lands, as we have seen, extended 
from Lake Erie to the Cumberland Mountains, 
thus covering the lands south-east of the Ohio, 
which Virginia desired to retain within her own 
jurisdiction. On the twenty-ninth of October, 
1782, 3Ir. Daniel Carroll, of Maryland, moved that 
Congress accept the right, title, jurisdiction, and 
claim of New York, as ceded by the agents of that 
state on the first of March, 1781. By the adoption 
of this motion, it was supposed that the offers of 
Connecticut and Virginia had received a decided 
rebuff, but, in the end, it was found necessary to 
conciliate Virginia, before proceeding to dispose 
of the western lands. On the thirteenth day of 
September, 1783, it was voted by Congress to 
accept the cession offered by Virginia, of the 
territory north-west of the Ohio, provided that 
state would waive the obnoxious conditions con- 

1 Journals of Congress, IV, p. 22. 



A^ 



cerning- the guaranty of Virginia's boundary, and 
the annulling of all other titles to the north-west 
territory. Virginia modified her conditions as 
requested, and on the twentieth of October, 1783,^ 
emi^owered her delegates in Congress to make the 
cession, which was done by Thomas Jefferson, and 
others, March 1, 1784, just three years after the 
accession of INFaryland to the Confederation. 

Massachusetts ceded her western lands, together 
with jurisdiction over the same, April 19, 1785, 
and Connecticut followed Sept. 14, 1786, reserving, 
however, certain lands south of Lake Erie for edu- 
cational and other purposes. This was the so- 
called "Connecticut Reserve," a tract nearly as 
large as the present State of Connecticut. Wash- 
ington strongly condemned this compromise- and 
Mr. Grayson said it was a clear loss to the United 
States of about six million acres already ceded 
by Virginia and New York. Connecticut granted 
five hundred thousand acres of this Reserve to 
certain of her citizens, whose property had been 
burned or destroyed during the Revolution and 
the lands thus granted were known as the Fire 
Lands. The remainder of the Reserve was sold 
in 1795 for $1,200,000, which sum has been used 
for schools and colleges. Jurisdiction over this 
tract was finally ceded to Congress, May 30, 1800, 

iSee Ilening's Statutes, XT., pp. 326-28. 
2 Writings ol Washington, IX., p. 178. 



53 



and thus, at the close of the century, the accession 
of north-west territory was complete.^ 

We have thus traced the process by which the 
great land cessions were eifected and have seen that 
it was primarily the opposition of Maryland to the 
grasping claims of Virginia, which put the train 
of compromise and land cessions in motion. We 
have seen that JSTew York first offered to cede her 
western territory in order "to facilitate the com- 
pletion of the Articles of Confederation," and, that 
on the very day her offer was formally made in 
Congress, Maryland laid the key-stone of the Con- 
federation and, as we shall attempt to show, of the 
American Union. We come now to the third 
and last topic of our research, viz : 

1 For deed of cession, see Land Laws of the United States, p. 107. 
Hon. James A. Garfield's paper on the " Discovery and Ownership of the 
North-western Territory, and Settlement of the Western Reserve," con- 
tains some valuable matter. It is No. 20 of the publications of the 
Western Reserve and Northern Ohio Historical Society, 1874. 

Although, in this paper, we are chiefly concerned with the Accession 
of the North-west Territory, we have thought it not improper to append 
the dates of those land cessions which were immediately occasioned by 
the above, and of those later accessions, by purchase or conquest, which 
have more than doubled our National Domain: 

South Carolina Cession, ..... 1787 

North Carolina " 1790 

Georgia " 1802 

Louisiana Purchase, ..... 1803 

Spanish Cession of Florida, .... 1819 

Texas Annexation, 1845 

First Mexican Cession, 1848 

Texas Cession, 1850 

Second Mexican Cession, or the Gadsden Purchase, 1853 

Alaska, 1867 

8 



54 



III. The Origin of our Territorial Govern- 
ment AND THE TRUE BaSIS OF NATIONAL SOV- 
EREIGNTY. 

We have seen that JMarylancl first suggested 
the idea of investing Congress with complete 
sovereignty over the western country, and that 
it was primarily through her intiuence that the 
land cessions were etfectcd. The constitutional 
importance of this acquisition of territory by 
the Confederation has never been brought out in 
its true light and proper historic connections. 
Writers have told us, indeed, how a meeting of 
commissioners from Maryland and Virginia at 
Alexandria, in 1785, to discuss and concert uni- 
form commercial regulations for these two states, 
w^as the original point of departure which led to 
the Annapolis and Philadelphia Conventions, and 
hence to the adoption of the present constitution, 
but no investigator appears to have discovered 
the intimate connection between the Virginia land 
cession of 1784, which we have just noticed, and 
this friendly conference between Maryland and 
Virginia, from which such great events are said to 
flow. What light, for example, is thrown upon 
that meeting in Alexandria by the following 
passage from a letter of James Madison to 
Thomas Jefferson, written in March, 1784, about 



55 



a fortnight after the Virginia cession, but a full 
year before the above commercial convention was 
brought about! "The good humor," Madison^ 
says, " into which the cession of the back lands 
must have put Maryland, forms an apt crisis for 
any negotiations which may be necessary." 

We have heard also, that these Alexandria 
commissioners went to Mount Vernon and there 
conferred with George Washington, who, as there 
is some reason to believe, first suggested a national 
convention to concert uniform commercial regu- 
lations for the whole country; but no one has ever 
shown how the first steps towards the organization 
of our public domain into new states were also 
suggested by George Washington and not by 
Thomas Jefferson, as is commonly supposed. 
The idea of parcelling out the western country 
" into free, convenient and independent govern- 
ments " was first ]3roclaimed by Maryland in 
those famous Instructions to her delegates, but 
the first definite |)/«;i for the formation of new 
states in the west is to be found in a letter^ 
written the seventh of September, 1783, by Gen- 
eral Washington to James Duane, member of 
Congress from New York. The letter contains a 
series of wise observations concerning " the line of 
conduct proper to be observed, not only towards 

1 Writings of Madison, I., p. 74. 

2 Sparks' Life and Writings of Washington, VIII,, p. 477. 



56 



tlie Indians, but for the government of the citizens 
of America in their settlement of the western 
country." Washington's suggestions in regard to 
laying out two new states are particularly inter- 
esting and valuable from an historical point of 
view, because the conformation which he recom- 
mends for them bears a striking resemblance to 
the present shape of Ohio and Michigan, whereas 
Jefferson's original suggestions for ten states in 
the north-west, lying in tiers, between meridians 
and parallels of latitude, was never adopted, and 
fortunately, perhaps, for the rei:)utation of the 
country; for Jeiferson would have named these 
states : Sylvania, Michigania, Chersonesus, Asseni- 
sipia, Metropotamia, Illinoia, Saratoga, Washing- 
ton, Polypotamia, and Pelisipia ! ^ The practical 
suggestions of George Washington with reference 
to adopting an Indian policy and some definite 
scheme for organizing the w^estern territory, were 
adopted almost word for word in a series of 
resolutions by Congress, which are to be found in 
the Secret Journals of that body, under the date 
of October 15, 1783." In referring to the regular 
Journal of Congress for the above date, we find 
the report of a committee consisting of Mr. Duane, 

1 National Intelligencer, August 26, 1847. Notes on the Ordinance of 
1787, by Peter Force. Sparks' Life and "Writings of Washington, 
IX., p. 48. 

2 Dr. Austin Scott, of the Johns Hopkins University, was the first to 
discover this remarkable coincidence. 



57 



of New York, Mr. Peters, of Pennsylvania, Mr. 
Daniel ^ Carroll, of Maryland^ and two other gentle- 
men, to which committee sundry letters and papers 
concerning Indian affairs had been referred. The 
committee acJinowledge in their report that they have 
conferred with the commander-in-chief. When now 
we recall the fact that the chairman of the above 
committee was James Duane, the very man to 
whom Washington addressed his letter of the 
seventh of September, the whole matter clears up 
and George Washington stands revealed as • the 
moving spirit in the first active measures for the 
organization of the Public Lands. 

Six days after the date of Washington's letter 
to James Duane, the report of the committee on 
the Virginia cession was called up and it was 
voted by Congress to accept A^irginia's offer un- 
der the conditions Avhich we have previously 
stated. That which interests us in this connec- 
tion is the attempt made by Mr. Carroll, of 
Maryland, to postpone the consideration of the 
Virginia offer for the adojotion of an important 
resolution in which the rights of absolute sov- 
ereignty over the western territory are claimed 

1 Charles Carroll of Carrollton left Congress in 1778. Daniel Carroll 
was delegate from 1780 to 1784 and again from 1789 to 1791. He signed 
the Articles of Confederation in the name of Maryland, and also the 
present Constitution. He seems to have exercised considerable influence 
in Congress. Ho was three times elected chairman and once appointed 
commissioner to treat with the Southern Indians, but declined the offici 
ou account of ill-health. 



58 



for tliG United States, " as one undivided and 
independent nation, with all and every power 
and right exercised by the king of Great Britain 
over the said territory." Mr. Carroll proposed 
in his resolution the appointment of a committee 
to report on the most eligible parcels of land 
for tlie formation of one or more convenient and 
independent states. Although unsuccessful, this 
is the boldest attempt that is recorded on the 
Journals of Congress for the assertion of national 
sovereignty and of the rights of eminent domain 
over the western territory} 

About one month later. Congress having voted 
to accept the Virginia offer, on certain conditions, 
we find the above committee on Indian affairs, 
of which Mr. Duane, of New York, was chairman 
and Mr. Carroll of Maryland a member, report- 
ing a series of resolutions in wdiich the influence 
of Washington may be clearly traced. It was 
declared to be a wise and necessary measure to 
erect a district of the western territory into a 
distinct government, and it was resolved that a 
committee should be appointed to report a plan 
for connecting; with the Confederation by a tern- 
porary government, the inhabitants of the new 
district until their number and circumstances 
should entitle them to form a permanent con- 
stitution for themselves, on republican principles 

1 Journals of Congress, W., pp. 2G3-2G5. 



39 

and, as citizens of a free, sovereign, and inde- 
pendent state, to be admitted into the union. 
In these resolutions lies the germ of Jeffer- 
son's ordinance, which was reported March 1, 
1784. This fact and the connection of Duane's 
resolutions with the original suggestions by 
George Washington have never before been 
brought out. The influence exerted by the sage 
of Mount Yernon upon the Alexandria commis- 
sioners towards the practical reform of our com- 
mercial regulations was like that exercised in 
the above scheme for establishing a territorial 
government north-west of the Ohio, even before 
that territory had been fully ceded. Washing- 
ton's plans were what the Germans would call 
^'hahibrecliendP His suggestions were the pioneer- 
thoughts of genius ; they opened up the ways and 
pointed out the means. 

We shall not be able in this paper to take 
up the Ordinance of 1784, much less that of 
1787, for the government of the North West 
Territory. Both of these themes are extremely 
important and require a careful investigation. 
We must be content with having found the mis- 
sing link which connects the Ordinance of 1784 
with the practical suggestions of George Wash- 
ington and with the original idea of Maryland 
that Congress should assume National Sovereignty 
over the western territor}^ Although this idea, 



GO 



which Maiyhmcl proclaimed as early as 1777, did 
not obtain that formal recognition which Mr. 
Carroll hoped to secure b}'^ his resolution of the 
thirteenth of September, 1783, yet, in the nature 
of things, arose a sovereign relation between the 
people of the United States and this territorial 
commonwealth in the west. 

And just here lies the immense significance of 
this acquisition of Public Lands. It led to the 
exercise of National Sovereignty in the sense of 
eminent domain, a power totally foreign to the 
Articles of Confederation. Congress had not the 
slightest authority to organize a government for 
the western territory. The Ordinance of 1784 
was never referred to the States for ratification, 
and yet its articles were termed a " charter of 
compact" and it was declared that they should 
stand as '"''fundamental constitutions^^ ^ between the 
thirteen original states and each of the new 
states therein described. Consider, moreover, the 
importance of the Ordinance of 1787 in estab- 
lishing the bulwarks of free soil beyond the Ohio 
and in providing for the educational interests of 
the Great North-West. "I doubt," says Daniel 
Webster,^ " whether one single law of any law- 
giver, ancient or modern, has produced effects of 

1 Journals of Congress, IV., p. 380. 

2 Webster's Works, III., p. 263. Webster was mistaken in ascribing 
the authorship of this famous Ordinance to Nathan Dane. Mr. W. F. 
Pooie, of Chicago, in his admirable monograpii on the Ordinance of 17b7 



61 



more distinct, marked, and lasting character than 
the Ordinance of 1787." 

This Ordinance is an exhibition of national 
sovereignty on the grandest scale, yet where was 
the authority for it? The present Constitution 
had not been adopted and yet Congress was pro- 
ceeding' to le2:islate on national interests with a 
boldness which might well have startled those 
Avho believed in the doctrine that Government 
derives its just powers from the consent of the 
governed. Madison, in a contribution to the 
Federalist, avails himself of this fact, that Con- 
gress was already exercising sovereignty as an 
argument for establishing constitutional govern- 
ment with defined powers. "It is now no longer 
a point of speculation and hope," he says, " that 
the western territory is a mine of vast wealth to 
the United States : . . . . Congress have assumed 
the administration of this stock. They have begun 
to render it productive. Congress have under- 
taken to do more : — they have proceeded to form 



(see North American Review, April, 1876) has proved conclusively that 
Mr. Dane could not have been the author, and has made out a strong 
case for Dr. Manasseh Cutler, of Massachusetts. The same view is taken 
in a paper read before the New Jersey Historical Society, May 16, 1872. 
See Proceedings of that society. Second Series (1867-74) III., p. 76. 
There is a paper on the "Ordinance of 1787" by Edward Coles, for- 
merly governor of Illinois (1822-26,) which was read before the Penn- 
sylvania Historical Society, June 9, 1856 and was issued by the Press of 
the Society in that year. It contains, however, many errors, which Mr. 
Poole has now set aside. Poole's article is reprinted in pamphlet form 
by Welch, Bigelow & Co., Cambridge, 1876. 

9 



62 



new states ; to erect temporary governments ; to 
appoint officers for them; and to prescribe the. 
conditions on which such states shall be admitted 
into the confederacy. All this has been done : and 
done witliout the least color of constitutional authority. 
Yet no blame has been whispered : no alarm has 
been sounded. A great and independent fund of 
revenue is passing into the hands of a single body 
of men, who can raise troops to an indefinite 
number, and appropriate money to their support 

for an indeiinite period of time I mean 

not by anything here said to throw censure on the 
measures which have been pursued by Congress. 
I am sensible they could not have done otherwise. 
The public interest, the necessity of the case, 
imposed upon them the task of overleaping their 
constitutional limits."^ 

Madison here reveals the true basis of political 
sovereignty. Public good and the necessities of 
the territorial situation are the sovereign law of 
every political commonwealth. The fundamental 
idea of a republic is the common good (respublica) 
and the radical notion of politics {7T62.ig) is govern- 
ment of civil society, which is first united by 
material interests. The good old word common- 
wealth best expresses to the English mind not only 

1 Federalist No. XXXVIll , Jan. 15, 1788. (Edition of J. C Hamil- 
ton, 1875, p. 299.) 



63 



the controlling principle of state-life which is the 
common weal, but the necessary condition of polit- 
ical existence which is the possession of a common 
country or territorial domain. 

It was the public interest of the original states 
in the western lands, as a means of satisfying 
army claims and defraying the expenses of the 
war, which held together thirteen de facto 
sovereign powers after independence had been 
achieved and the recommendations of Congress 

o 

had become a laughing-stock. The Confederation, 
in itself, was a mere league and Congress little 
more than a committee of public safety appointed 
by thirteen colonies which desired territorial inde- 
pendence in common but self-government and 
state-sovereignty for each. AVhen the war was 
over, these jealous powers would have fallen apart 
if there had been no other influence than Congress 
to hold them together. It was only external pres- 
sure which had united the colonies, and without 
permament territorial interests Congress would have 
been, indeed, " a shadow without the substance," 
as Washington termed it, and the country, " one 
nation to-day and thirteen to-morrow," as best 
suited the purposes of individual states. But out 
of this sovereign relation which was established 
between the United States and their j^ublic 
domain, was developed a truly national sever- 



64 



eigiity. JMadison^ speaks of this new manifesta- 
tion of energy as "an excrescent power," growing 
"out of the lifeless mass" of the Confederation, 
and yet he justifies the acts of Congress for the 
government of the western territory, on grounds 
of necessity and of the public good. A surer 
foundation for national sovereignty has never been 
discovered. Political science no longer defends 
the Social Contract as the basis of government. 
The best writers of our day reject those atomistic 
theories of State, which would derive national 
sovereignty from compact, or arithmetical majori- 
ties, and not from the commonwealth, or the 
solidarity of public interests. 

Government is derived from the living necessi- 
ties and united interests of a people. The State 
does not rest upon compact or written constitu- 
tions. There is something more fundamental than 
delegated powers or chartered sovereignty. The 
state is grounded upon that community of material 
interests which arises from the permanent relation 
of a people to some fixed territory. Government 
can exist among men who have no enduring- 
interest in land, as, for example, among nomadic 
hordes, but the State stands firm, although capable 
of organic development. Dynasties may change 
and the principles of Government become wholly 

1 Federalist, No. XXXVIII., p. 299. 



65 



republican, but 'England would endure so long as 
a sovereign and abiding relation subsists between 
the English people and their island domain.^ The 
element of continuity in every state-life is directly 
dependent upon this sovereign relation between a 
people and some fixed territory. Remove a peo- 
ple from their domain and you destroy their state. 
If the Puritans of Massachusetts had accepted the 
invitation^ of Lord Baltimore and removed to 
Maryland, it is to be presumed that Plymouth 
Rock and the Bay State would have fallen into 
oblivion or acquired a totally different place in New 
England history. The Pilgrims' Compact is often 
cited as an example of the " Social Contract," but 
suppose the people of JN^ew England had accepted 
Cromwell's advice^ and migrated to tropical 
Jamaica, is it likely that their compact would 
have established a JS^ew England in that fertile 
island, which pours its wealth so " prodigally into 
the lap of industry?" Territorial influences enter 
so largely into the constitution and political life 
of a state that we cannot conceive of a political 
commonwealth as existing independently of certain 

1 Das Staatsgebiet ist entschieden fiir den Staat und seine Entwickelung 
von fundanientaler Bedeutiing, was schon daraus hervorgcht, dass man 
gewohnlich in der Benennung den Staat mit demselben identificirt. 
"Winkler, Das Staatsgebiet. Eine cultur-geograpliische Studie, p. 3, 
Leipzig, 1877. 

2 Bancroft, History of tlic United States, I., p. 253. 

3 Bancroft, History of the United States, I., p. 446. 



66 



material conditions.^ It is, therefore, but a partial 
truth when the hiwyer-poet^ says : 

Mon who their duties know, 

But know their rights and knowing dare maintain, 
******* 

These constitute a state. 

Although a free and sovereign people is un- 
doubtedly the animating life of the American 
Republic, yet that life has a material basis of which 
waiters on American constitutional history have 
taken too little cognizance. jNTo state without a 
people, but no state without land:^ these are the 
fundamental principles of political science and 
were recognized as early as the days of Aristotle.* 
The common interest of all the states in .our 
western territory was the first truly national com- 
monwealth upon American shores, for it bound 
these states together into a permanent political 
union and established a sovereign relation between 
the United States and a territorial domain. AVitli- 
out public interests of a solid and lasting char- 
acter the military union of thirteen de facto 
sovereign powers would never have grown into a 



1 Der Staat .... geht aus naturlichen Bedingungen hervor ; pliysische 
Verhiiltnisse sind die Grundlage seiner Existenz und Entwickelung. 
Winkler, Das Staatsgebiet, p. 3. 

2 Sir William Jones, first translator of the Laws of Manu, and a pioneer 
of Comparative Jurisprudence as well as of Comparative Philology. 

SBluntschli, Statsle.hrefur Gehildete, p. 12. " Kein Stat ohue Land." 
See also Lehre vom Modernen Stat. I,, p. 15. (Stuttgart, 1875.) 
■1 Arislotii', Polit. 111., 5, H. 



67 

national union with inherent rights of sovereignty. 
"Constitutions are not made," says Sir James 
Macintosh, "they grow." The American Repub- 
lic is the product, not of concessions or concensus, 
but of development from the existing relations of 
tJiinf/s. Political interests of a lasting character 
were entailed upon the Confederation by the 
possession of a territorial commonwealth. "From 
the very origin of the government," said Daniel 
Webster in his iirst great speech on the Public 
Lands in answer to Mr. Hayne of South Carolina, 
" From the very origin of the government these 
western lands and the just protection of those 
who had settled or should settle on them, have 
been the leading objects in our policy."^ 

But Ave have seen that even before the adoption 
of our present form of government, these western 
lands constituted the most vital and absorbing 
question in American politics. The acquisition of 
a territorial commonAvealth by these states was 
the foundation of a i^ermanent union; it was the 
first solid arch upon wdiich the framers of our 
Constitution could build. 

When now we consider the practical results 
arising from Maryland's prudence in laying the 
key-stone to the old Confederation only after the 
land-claims of the larger states had, through her 
influence, been placed upon a national basis, we 

i Webster's Works, III., p. 251. 



68 



may say, with truth, that it was a National Com- 
monwealth wliicli Maryland founded. It seems 
strange that so little attention has been devoted 
to the question of Public Lands ^ and their influ- 
ence upon the constitutional development of this 
country. In ^'iew of the fact that the greatest 
conflict in American politics has been for the 
organization of the west upon the i:>rinciples of 
the Ordinance of 1787, it would seem as though 
the subject of the Territorial Commonwealth of 
the American Union might justly demand from 
our students of history something more than " the 
cold respect of a passing glance." 



iThe author is indebted to Dr. Emil Otto, of Heidelberg, for a copy 
of a dissertation on Die Public Lands der Vereinigten Staaten von Nord- 
Amerika. Inav.gural-DisHertation zur Erlangung der Doctorwurde von 
der juristischen Faculiat der FriedrieJi -Wilhehns -Universdiit zu Berlin, 

von James P. Foster aiis New-York. Berlin, 19 April, 1877. 

Although Dr. Foster has anticipated his countrj'man and former fellow- 
studont, by scientifically investigating the question of " Public Lands," 
still, as a lawyer, he has considered legal relations rather than historic 
processes, and has not touched at all upon the points made in this article. 



69 

The Ordinance of 1787 is but the legal outcome 
of INIaryland's successful policy in advocating 
National Sovereignty over the Western Lands. 
The leading principles of this Ordinance are now 
recognized in all parts of our country, but those 
principles were long ago approved of by Mary- 
land, although in a somewhat singular manner. 
In 1833, when the vessel sailed which carried 
to western Africa the emigrants who were to 
establish, under the auspices of the Maryland 
State Colonization Society, the colony of Mary- 
land in Liberia, at Cape Palmas, the agent of the 
society took with him two documents, the one a 
Constitution, containing a Bill of Rights, and 
the other an Ordinance for the government of 
the territory about to be acquired. The w^ork of 
preparing these instruments was done by Mr. 
John H. B. Latrobe, then the corresponding 
secretary of the society and one of its most active 
members. The animating i)rinciples of these in- 
struments, and, to some extent, their very form 
and substance, were furnished by the famous 
Ordinance of 1787. When the Constitution and 
Ordinance were reported to the society by the 
secretary, they were unanimously adopted, with- 
out alteration. Subsequently a committee con- 
sisting of Mr. Latrobe, Mr. Evans, and Mr. 
Andersen, prepared a code of laws for the redress 
of injuries and for the regulation of property, 
10 



70 



together with a collection of legal forms, which 
have been in use up to the present time. The 
work of this committee was done by Mr. Evans.^ 

From the remarks of the President of the 
Historical Society after this paper had been read, 
it wouhl appear that he and his colleagues in the 
Maryland Colonization movement, scarcely real- 
ized how consistent their action was with the 
ancient policy of this State, when the legal out- 
come of that policy, or the Ordinance of 1787, was 
thus unanimously adopted for the government of 
Maryland's own Colony in Liberia. Extremes 
meet in History as well as in Politics, and the 
present age could read a r^'^oi aavrbv, or 'know thy- 
self,' in the records of the past. It was the cus- 
tom of Greek colonists, setting out from Athens 
or Corinth, to take with them fire from the pry- 
taneum of their native city, as emblematic of the 
political life, which they were to kindle upon 
some distant shore. Unlike the Grreek colonists 
in political genius or capacity for freedom, but 
like them in the desire, common to all colonists, 
of improving their material condition, the emi- 
grants to Liberia from this State gladly received 

iSee Memoir of Hugh Davey Evans, LL. D. By the Rev. Hall 
Harrison, M. A Hartford: printed by the Church Press Company, 
1870, p. 159. For the two instruments first mentioned and for the 
code of laws, see Constitution and Laws of Maryhmd in Liberia. Jialti- 
more, 1847. The Ordinance of 1787 is printed in the Land Laws of the 
United Slates, pp. 330-61, and also in the Old Journals of Congress, IV., 
pp 752-54. 



71 



from Maryland a system of equal laws. Who 
shall say that the Ordinance which was given 
them for their future government was wholly a 
borrowed fire, when the original Ordinance of 
1787 is itself the historic product of Maryland's 
ancient zeal in founding a JN^ational Common- 
wealth. 



APPENDIX. 
I. 

Washington's Land Speculations. 

Perkins, in his Anuals of the West, says that Washington 
was one of the foremost speculators in Western Lands after the 
close of the French and Indian War.^ The Washington-Craw- 
ford Letters, recently edited in a most thorough and painstaking 
manner by C. W. Butterfield,- throw a strong light upon the 
enterprising nature of that man who was, assuredly, " first in 
peace " and who, even if the Revolution had not broken out, 
would have become the most active and representative spirit in 
American affairs. Washington's schemes for the colonization of 
his western lands by importing Germans from the Palatinate, 
are but an index of the direction his business pursuits might have 
taken, had not duty called him to command the Army and after- 
wards to head the State. But the influence of some of these 
early schemes may be traced in Washington's later measures of 
public policy and in his plans for the internal improvement of his 
country. Reserving, however, for another topic Washington's 
pioneer-efforts for opening up communication with the West, let 
us examine a few portions of the documentary evidence relating 
to his early land speculations. There is nothing to Washington's 
discredit in any of the Washington-Crawford Letters, but the 
following extracts may afford an interesting revelation of the 
worldly wisdom of the Father of his Country. 

iPorkins, Annals of the West, p. 110. 

i2 Washington-Crawford Letters concerning Western Lands. By C. 
W. Butterfield, Cincinnati: Kobert Clarke A; Co. 1877. 

72 



73 



In Washington's letter to his friend Crawford,' dated Septem- 
ber 21, 1767, the whole scheme of taking up the bounty lands is 
broached : " I offered in my last to join you in attempting to 
secure some of the most valuable lands in the King's part, which 
I think may be accomplished after awhile, notwithstanding the 
proclamation that restrains it at present, and prohibits the 
settling of them at all ; for I can never look upon that procla- 
mation in any other light (but this I say between ourselves) 
than as a temporary expedient to quiet the minds of the Indians. 
It must fall, of course, in a few years, especially when those 
Indians consent to our occupying the lands. Any person, there- 
fore, who neglects the present opportunity of hunting out good 
lands, and in some measure marking and distinguishing them 
for his own, in order to keep others from settling them, will 
never regain it If you will be at the trouble of seeking out 
the lands, I will take upon me the part of securing them, as soon 
as there is a possibility of doing it, and will, moreover, be at all 
the cost and charges of surveying and patenting the same. You 
shall then have such a reasonable proportion of the whole as we 
may fix upon at our first meeting ; as I shall find it necessary, 
for the better furthering of the design, to let some of my friends 
be concerned in the scheme, who must also partake of the ad- 
vantages. 

By this time it may be easy for you to discover that my plan 
is to secure a good deal of land. You will consequently come in 
for a very handsome quantity ; and as you will obtain it without 

1 William Crawford was a Virginia officer, who had served in the 
French and Indian War and who, in early life, had learned the art of 
surveying from Washington. Crawford removed to the back country in 
1766 and settled at ''Stewart's Crossing," on the Youghiogheny river. 
In the following j'ear, Washington began a correspondence with his old 
friend which lasted until 1781. The particulars concerning Crawford's 
awful death by torture, at the hands of Indian savages, are given in 
"Crawford's Campaign against Sandusky in 1782," by C. W. Butterfield 
the editor of the above correspondence. See also Perkins, Annals of the 
West, pp. 246-7. 



any costs or expenses, I hope you will be encouraged to begin 
the search in time. I would choose, if it were practicable, to 
get large tracts together ; and it might be desirable to have them 
as near your settlement or Fort Pitt as they can be obtained of 
good quality, but not to neglect others at a greater distance, if 
fine bodies of it lie in one place. It may be worthy of your 
inquiry to find out how the Maryland back line will run,^ and 
what is said about laying off Neale's grant. I will inquire 
particularly concerning the Ohio Company, that we may know 
what to apprehend from them. For my own part, I should have 
no objection to a grant of land upon the Ohio, a good way below 
Pittsburgh, but would first willingly secure some valuable tracts 
nearer at hand. 

I recommend, that you keep this whole matter a secret, or 
trust it only to those in whom you can confide, and who can 
assist you in bringing it to bear by their discoveries of land. 
This advice proceeds from several very good reasons, and, in 
the first place, because I might be censured for the opinion I 
have given in respect to the King's proclamation, and then, if the 
scheme I am now proposing to you were known, it might give 
the alarm to others, and, by putting them upon a plan of the 
same nature, before we could lay a proper foundation for success 
ourselves, set the different interests clashing, and, probably, in 
the end, overturn the whole. All this may be avoided by a silent 

1 In regard to this point, Crawford replies September 29, 1767: 
" There is nothing to be feared from the Maryland back line, as it does 
not go over the mountain." (Wa.shington-Crawford Letters, p. 10.) 
There had been a controversy, as we learn from Butterfield, between 
Maryland and Virginia, respecting the exact whereabouts of the said 
back line, for, in the Maryland charter, it was defined as a meridian, 
extending from the " first fountain of the Potomac " to the northern 
limits of Terra Marice. Maryland claimed the "first fountain of the 
nortn branch of the Potomac, as the starting-point of this meridian line, 
whereas Virginia insisted that the head of the south branch should be 
taken, for this would infringe, to a less degree, upon the hitter's western 
territory." Crawford meant that, admitting Maryland's claim, the back 
line could not be run west of the mountains. 



/o 



management, and the operation carried on by you under the 
guise of hunting game, which you may, I presume, efifeetually do, 
at the same time you are in pursuit of land. When this is fully 
discovered, advise me of it, and if there appears but a possibility 
of succeeding at any time hence, I will have the lands immediately 
surveyed, to keep others off, and leave the rest to time and my 
own assiduity. 

If this letter should reach your hands before you set out, I 
should be glad to have your thoughts fully expressed on the plan 
here proposed, or as soon afterwards as convenient ; for I am 
desirous of knowing in due time how you approve of the scheme. 
I am, etc." i 

The following extract from Crawford's answer to the above 
letter shows that the project suited him : 

" With regard to looking out land in the King's part, I shall 
heartily embrace your offer upon the terms you proposed ; and as 
soon as I get out and have my affairs settled in regard to the first 
matters proposed, I shall set out in search of the latter. This 
may be done under a hunting scheme (which I intended before 
you wrote to me), and I had the same scheme in ray head, but 
was at a loss how to accomplish it. I wanted a person in whom 
I could confide — one whose interest could answer my ends and 
his own. I have had several offers, but have not agreed to any ; 
nor will I with any but yourself or whom you think proper." 

In 1770, Washington crossed the Alleghanies and visited his 
friend Crawford, to see how the latter had succeeded in spying 
out the land. Washington's Journal of his tour to the Ohio is 
very interesting and contains the most minute details as to his 
impressions concerning the western country. Washington left 
his home at Mount Vernon on the fifth of October and arrived at 
Crawford's on the morning of the thirteenth. The following 
selections from his Journal will suffice to illustrate its tenor : 

1 Washington-Crawford Letters, pp. 3-5, or Sparks' Life and Writ- 
ings of Washington. II, pp. 346-50. 



76 



]3tli. — Set out about sunrise; breakfasted at the Great Meadows 
— tliirteen miles — and readied Captain Crawford's about five 
o'clock. The land from Gist's to Crawford's is very broken, though 
not mountainous ; in spots exceedingly rich, and, in general, free 
from stones. Crawford's is very fine land ; lying on the Youghi- 
ogheny, at a place commonly called Stewart's Crossing. 

14th — At Captain Crawford's all day. Went to see a coal 
mine, not far from his house, on the banks of the river. The coal 
seemed to be of the very best kind, burning freely, and abun- 
dance of it. 

15th. — Went to view some land, which Captain Crawford had 
taken up for me near the Youghiogheny, distant about twelve 
miles. This tract, which contains about one thousand si.x hun- 
dred acres, includes some as fine land as ever I saw, and a great 
deal of rich meadow. It is well watered, and has a valuable mill- 
seat, except that the stream is rather too slight, and, it is said, not 
constant more than seven or eight months in the year ; but, on 
account of the fall, and other conveniences, no place can exceed 
it. In going to this land, I passed through two other tracts, 
which Captain Crawford had taken up for my brothers, Samuel 
and John. I intended to have visited the land, which Crawford 
had procured for Lund Washington, this day also, but, time fall- 
ing short, I was obliged to postpone it. Night came on before I 

got back to Crawford's The lands, which I passed over 

to-day, were generally hilly, and the growth chiefly white oak, but 
very good notwithstanding ; and, what is extraordinary, and con- 
trary to the pro|)erty of all other lands I ever saw before, the hills 
are the ricliest land; the soil upon the sides and summits of them 
being as black as a coal, and the growth walnut and cherry. The 
flats are not so rich, and a good deal more mixed with stone. 

[The lands above described were not taken up as bounty-lands, 
but under patents issued by the land-office of Pennsylvania. On 
the twentieth of October, Washington and Crawford, with a small 
party of white men and Indians, started on a trip down the Ohio, 



77 



to view the lands on tliat river and on the Great Kanawha, which 
Washington intended to secure for himself and his friends, under 
the proclamation of IT 63, which authorized the granting of two 
hundred thousand acres of bounty- land to officers and soldiers 
who had served in the French and Indian War. The party- 
reached the confluence of the Great Kanawha and Ohio rivers in 
twelve days from Pittsburgh.] 

November 1st — Before eight o'clock we set off with our canoe 
up the river, to discover what kind of lands lay upon the Kanawha. 
The land on both sides this river, just at the mouth, is very fine; 
but, on the east side, when you get towards the hills which I 
judge to be about six or seven hundred yards from the river, it 
appears to be wet, and better adapted for meadow than tillage. 
.... We judged we went up the Kanawha about ten miles 
to-day 

2nd. — We proceeded up the river, with the canoe, about four 
miles farther, and then encamped, and went a hunting; killed 
five buffaloes, and wounded some others, three deer, &c. This 
country abounds in buffaloes and wild game of all kinds ; and also 
in all kinds of wild fowl, there being in the bottoms a great many 
small, grassy ponds, or lakes, which are full of swans, geese, and 
ducks of different kinds 

3d — We set off down the river, on our return homeward, and 
encamped at the mouth. At the beginning of the bottom above 
the junction of the rivers, and at the mouth of the branch on the 
east side, I marked two maples, an elm, and hoop-wood tree, as a 
corner of the soldiers' land (if we can get it), intending to take 
all the bottom from hence to the rapids in the Great Bend into 
one survey. I also marked at the mouth of another run, lower 
down on the west side, at the lower end of the long bottom, an 
ash and hoop wood for the beginning of another of the soldiers' 
surveys, to extend up so as to include all the bottom in a body on 
the west side. In coming from our last encampment up the 
11 



■8 



Kanawha, I endeavored to take the courses and distances of the 
river by a pocket compass, and l)y guessing. 
******** 

December 1st. — Reached liome, having- been absent nine weeks 
and one day.^ 

The practical results of the above expedition appear in the fol- 
lowing advertisement in the Maryland Journal and Baltimore 
Advertiser of August 20, 1773 : 

Mount Yernon in Virginia, July 15, 1773. 

The subscriber having obtained patents for upwards of twenty 
thousand acres of land on the Ohio and Great Kanawha (ten thou- 
sand of which are situated on the banks of the first-mentioned river, 
between the mouths of the two Kanawhas, and the remainder on 
the Great Kanawha, or New River, from the mouth, or near it, 
upwards, in one continued survey) proposes to divide the same 
into any sized tenements that may be desired, and lease them 
upon moderate terms, allowing a reasonable number of years rent 
free, provided, witliin the space of two years from next October, 
three acres for every fifty contained in each lot, and proportion- 
ably for a lesser quantity, shall be cleared, fenced, and tilled; and 
that, by or before the time limited for the commencement of the 
first rent, five acres for every hundred, and proportionably, as 
above, shall I)e enclosed and laid down in good grass for meadow; 
and moreover, that at least fifty fruit trees for every like quantity 
of land shall be planted on the Premises. Any persons inclinable 
to settle on these lands may be more fully informed of the terms 
by applying to the subscriber, near Alexandria, or in his absence 
to Mr. Lund Washington ; and would do well in communicat- 
ing their intentions before the 1st of October next, in order 
that a sufficient number of lots may be laid off to answer the 
demand. 

1 Writings of Washington, II., pp. 516-34. 



79 



As these lands are among tlie first which have been surveyed in 
the part of the country they lie in, it is almost needless to pre- 
mise that none can exceed them in luxuriance of soil, or con- 
venience of situation, all of them lying upon the banks either 
of the Ohio and Kanawha, and abounding with fine fish and 
wild fowl of various kinds, as also in most excellent meadows, 
many of which (by the bountiful hand of nature) are, in their 
present state, almost fit for the scythe. From every part of these 
lands water carriage is now had to Fort Pitt, by an easy com- 
munication ; and from Fort Pitt, up the Monongahela, to Red- 
stone, vessels of convenient burthen, may and do pass continually ; 
from whence by means of Cheat River, and other navigable 
branches of the Monongahela, it is thought the portage to Potow- 
mack may, and will, be reduced within the compass of a few- 
miles, to the great ease and convenience of the settlers in trans- 
porting the produce of their lands to market. To which may be 
added, that as patents have now actually passed the seals for the 
several tracts here offered to be leased, settlers on them may cul- 
tivate and enjoy the lands in peace and safety, notwithstanding 
the unsettled counsels respecting a new colony on the Ohio; and 
as no right money is to be paid for these lands, and quitrent of 
two shillings sterling a hundred, deraandahle some years hence 
only, it is highly presumable that they will always be held upon a 
more desirable footing than where both these are laid on with a 
very heavy hand. And it may not be amiss further to observe, 
that if the scheme for establishing a new government on the Ohio, 
in the manner talked of, should ever be effected, these must be 
among the most valuable lands in it, not only on account of the 
goodness of soil, and the other advantages above enumerated, but 
from their contiguity to the seat of government, which more than 
probable will be fixed at the mouth- of the Great Kanawha. 

GEORGE WASHINGTON. 

These lands were patented by Lord Dunmore, Governor of 
Virginia, as we know from Washington's own statement to the 



80 



Reverend John Witherspoon, in a letter dated March 10, 1784,' 
in which he describes his western lands. From inferential evi- 
dence we are inclined to think that Washington obtained these 
patents before any general issue of land-grants had been made to 
the officers and soldiers. We know that Wasliington entered the 
claims of all those who applied to him for assistance, and that too 
as early as 1771,' but the general tenor of the Washington-Craw- 
ford Letters from that date up to January, 1774, indicates that 
no official grants had been issued.'' In a letter to Crawford, 
dated September 25, 1773, Washington says, "I would recom- 
mend it to you to use dispatch, for, depend upon it, if it be once 
known that the Governor will grant patents for these lands, 
[below the Scioto,] the officers of Pennsylvania, Maryland, 
Carolina, etc., will flock there in shoals, and every valuable spot 
will be taken up contiguous to tbe river, on which the lauds, 
unless it be where there are some peculiar properties, will always 
be most valuable."^ I seems that Washington was mistaken in 
regard to the governor's intention, for, in a letter dated Septem- 
ber 24, 1773, one day previous to the date of the above, Dunmore 
declares positively to Washington, that he does not mean to grant 
any patents on the western waters. '^ And yet, from the above 
advertisement, it is clear that Washington himself already held 
patents on western waters for upwards of twenty thousand acres.® 
It will be noticed, however, that Washington does not speak of 
these lands as patented under the proclamation of 17G3, and yet, 
from allusions to them in his own letters, we know that they were 
thus obtained as bounty-lands, "' and that Washington bought up 
the claims of his fellow-officers to a consideroble extent. The 

1 Writings of Washington, XII., p. :264, or Wasliington-Crawford 
Letters, p, 77. 

2 Writings of Washington, II., p. 367. 

3 Wasliington-Crawford Letters, e. g. pp. 23, 25, 2(j, 29, 33, 35, 40. 

4 Washington-Crawford Letters, p. 33 
T) Writings of Washington, II., p. 379. 

t; Some light on this fact may, perhaps, be seen in the Writings of 
W^ashington, II., p. 3G7. 

7 Washington-Crawford Letters, p. 78. 



81 

followiug lettter to Crawford affords positive evidence on this 
point : 

Mount Vernon, September 25, 1773. 

" Dear Sir : — I have heard (the truth of which, if you saw 
Lord Dunmore in his way to or from Pittsburgh, you possibly are 
better acquainted with than I am) that his Lordship will grant 
patents for lands lying below the Scioto, to the officers and sol- 
diers who claim under the proclamation of October, 1763. If so, 
I think no time should be lost in having them surveyed, lest some 
new revolution should happen in our political system. I have, 
therefore, by this conveyance, written to Captain Bullitt, to 
desire he will have ten thousand acres surveyed for me ; live 
thousand of which I am entitled to in my own right ; the other 
five thousand, by purchase from a captain and lieutenant, 
******** 

Old David Wilper, who was an officer in our regiment, and 
has been with Bullitt running out land for himself and others, tells 
me that they have already discovered four salt springs in that 
country ; three of which Captain Thompson has included within 
some surveys he has made ; and the other, an exceedingly valua- 
ble one, upon the River Kentucky, is in some kind of dispute. I 
wish I could establish one of my surveys there ; I would imme- 
diately turn it to an extensive public benefit, as well as private 
advantage. However, as four are already discovered, it is more 
than probable there are many others ; and if you could come at 
the knowledge of them by means of the Indians, or otherwise, I 
would join you in taking them up in the name or names of some 
persons who have a right under the proclamation, and whose 
right we can be sure of buying, as it seems there is no other 
method of having lands granted ; but this should be done with a 
good deal of circumspection and caution, till patents are obtained." ' 

1 Writings of Washington's, II., pp. 375-77, or Washington-Craw- 
ford Letters, pp. 29-31. 



82 



Exactly how much land Washington succeeded in getting 
patents for, it is difficult to say. From his letters to John 
Witherspoon and Presley Neville we know that he obtained, at 
least, 32,373 acres under the signature of Lord Dunmore.i Of 
this amount, ten thousand acres were doubtless secured about the 
beginning of the year 1774, when Lord Dunmore began to grant 
patents officially. In the preceding letter it will be noticed that 
Washington speaks of his desire to have that quantity of land 
surveyed. Reckoning the latter with the " upwards of twenty 
thousand acres" which Washington advertised in the Maryland 
Journal and Baltimore Advertiser, we can fairly account for the 
above 32,373 acres. It is not improbable that Washington 
owned at one time, even a larger amount of land than this, which 
he speaks of in the above letter to Presley Neville as still pos- 
sessing in 1794. 

At the office of the Johns Hopkins University there may be 
seen an original plot of survey, executed, probably, by Crawford, 
but, possibly, by Washington himself (for it contains some of his 
own handwriting), of 28,400 acres of land on the Little Kanawha 
river, patented in the name of Captain Stobo's heirs, of Captain 
Vanbraam, and of several other parties.- We have discovered 

1 Writings of Washington, XII., 2G4, 317, or Washington-Crawford 
Letters, pp 77, 82. 

2 This map of survey, formerly the property of Reverdy Johnson, Esq., 
was first recognized by President Gilman as containing some of George 
Washington's own handwriting, and, through the courtesy of Mr John- 
son, this map, now framed, graces the President's office at the Universitj'. 
Professor J. E Hilgard, of the U. S. Coast survey, has called attention 
to the careful and accurate method of protraction employed in this plot 
of survey. It will be noticed that the course of the river is indicated by ' 
the straight lines of survey, and not by curves. 

The Publication Committee of the Marj^land Historical Society, Messrs. 
Stockbridge, Cross, and Lee, have generously undertaken to present to 
our readers a. facsimile of this interesting relic. The words "Plot of 
the Survey on the Little Kanawha, 28,400 a(!res made in 1773," are 
written on the back of the original map, but have been photographed and 
inserted in iha facsimile for the sake of showing the whole. 



83 



allusions to these two officers in the Writings of Washington (II., 
pp. 365, 368,) and know that they entered their claims, along 
with those of other friends* and acquaintances of Washington, in 
the year 1771, but these two officers were out of the country and, 
as Washington complained, had not advanced their share of the 
expenses attending the surveys. It is highly probable that Cap- 
tain Stobo (or his heirs) and Captain Yanbraam became tired of 
waiting for patents and sold out their claims to Washington, as 
did several gentlemen in this country. But we have more 
positive evidence that Washington owned property at the mouth 
of the Little Kanawha And, in this connection, Lord Dun- 
more's interest in western lands must be slightly exposed. There 
is some obscurity attached to the royal governor's conduct and 
prudent delay in granting patents for the bounty lands, but there 
is no reason for suspecting Washington, for we know that he did 
his utmost to prevail upon Dunmore and his predecessor, Lord 
Botetourt, to hasten the grants.^ 

In the spring of 1773, we find Dunmore making arrangements 
with Washington for a trip over the mountains. The latter ex- 
presses his willingness to accompany the governor, about the first 
of July, "through any and every part of the western country" 
which Dunmore might think proper to visit. Crawford is recom- 
mended as a guide, because of " his superior knowledge of the 
country." Washington was prevented, however, by a family afflic- 
tion, - from carrying out the project, but Dunmore went without 
him, and, very naturally, visited Crawford in his western home. 



1 See Letters to Lord Botetourt, the Earl of Dunmore, and George 
Mercer, 177U-1. "Writings of Washington, II., pp. Sob, 359, 365, 378. 
This coriespondence ought to be published in every collection of docu- 
ments relating to Western Lands. It would not be amiss in the Appen- 
dix to Butterfield's next edition, for these letters set Washington's 
character in a very clear light as regards honorable intentions by his 
fuliovv-ofRcers. 

2 The death of Miss Cu«tis, daughter of Jlrs. Washington by her for- 
mer marriage. See Sparks' Life and Writings of Washington, II., p. 378. 



84 



" the occasion being turned to profitable account," Butterfield 
thinks, " by botli parties : by the Earl, in getting reliable informa 
tion of desirable lauds ; by Crawford,-* in obtaining promises for 
patents for such as he had sought out and surveyed." These 
promises on Dunmore's part related to lands at the mouth of the 
Little Kanawha. This is evident from two passages in Crawford's 
letters to Washington : " In my last letter to you I wrote you 
that Lord Dunmore had promised me that in case the new govern- 
ment did not take place before he got home, he would patent 
these lands for me if I would send him the draft of the land I 
surveyed on the mouth of the Little Kanawha "^ This passage 
is ambiguous, but it settles one point: the proposed draft of land 
was at the mouth of the Little Kanawha. The second passage, 
which is from a subsequent letter, clears up the ambiguity ; 
" Lord Dunmore promised me most faithfully, that when I sent 
him the draft of land on the Little Kanawha that he would patent 
it/or me ; and in my letter to you I mentioned it, but have not 
heard anything from you relating to it."'^ 

Now comes Washington's relation to the lands at the mouth of 
the Little Kanawha. The passage from Crawford, which was 
quoted first, is in immediate connection with the following offer: 
" Now, as my claim as an officer can not include the whole, if you 
will join as much of your officer's claim as will take all of the 
survey, you may depend I will make any equal division you may 
propose. I told Lord Dunmore the true state of the matter." 
The passage which was quoted in the second place, is immediately 
preceded by this statement: " He [Doctor Connolly, Lord Dun- 
more's agent] further told me that you had applied for my land 
as an officer, and could not obtain it without a certificate, or my 
being present ; which puts me at a loss, in some measure, how to 
take it, especially as you have not written on that head." In this 
and in the succeeding sentence, above quoted, Crawford manifests 

1 Washington-Crawford Letters, p. 3-3. 
'•i Washington-Crawford Letters, ]>. 40. 



85 



some anxiety in regard to securiug patents on the lands at the 
mouth of the Little Kanawha, having heard nothing from Wash- 
ington on that score. 

And now comes the conclusion of the matter, as far as our 
evidence goes. In a letter to Washington, dated September 20, 
1*174, and, therefore, after patents had been issued in sufficient 
quantities to cover all purposes of speculation, Crawford says: 
" I have, I believe, as much land lying on the Little Kanawha as 
will make up the quantity you want, that I intended to lay your 
grants on ; hut if you want it, you can have it, and I will try to 
get other land for that purpose " [up river, as he proceeds to 
describe.] The sense of this passage is somewhat ambiguous, 
but, in the light of the foregoing facts, we think it must be inter- 
preted as follows: Crawford had surveyed a large tract of land 
at the mouth of the Little Kanawha ; he had offered to share it 
with Washington ; the letter had applied for Crawford's patent 
and had secured certain grants in which he and Crawford were to 
have a joint interest, which grants Crawford had intended to lay 
upon the lands at the mouth of the Little Kanawha ; but Wash- 
ington, for some reason, desired to make up a quantity of land 
for himself, in one tract, and Crawford tells him that if he wants 
the whole tract at the mouth of the Little Kanawha, he can have 
it, and he himself will lay the warrants, in which he and Wash- 
ington have a joint interest, upon a certain parcel of land " fifteen 
or twenty miles up that river, on the lower side, and [which] is 
already run out in tracts of about three thousand and some odd 
acres ; others about twenty-five hundred acres ; all well marked 
and bounded." This interpretation is borne out by the fact that 
Crawford's name does not appear in the list of patentees, which 
was written by Washington himself on the above mentioned map 
of survey, although the tract at the mouth of the Little Kanawha 
was certainly the one which Crawford originally surveyed for him- 
self and which he desired to have Washington join him in securing. 
It is possible that the words " Former Survey," which are to be 

12 



86 



seen in the preceding plate, ha^e reference to Crawford's first sur- 
vey of the locality, a draft of which he sent to Lord Duiiiiiore. It 
is hig'lijy probable that Washington bought up the claims of all 
the parties, in whose names the patents for the land at the mouth 
of the Little Kanawha were drawn, as the list itself shows, and 
secured the entire 28,400 acres for himself in one tract. Wash- 
ington's practice of clapping purchased warrants upon Crawford's 
land surveys is made evident by the following passage from one of 
Crawford's letters, dated March 6, 1775: "Inclosed you have 
two plats which you must fix warrants to yourself and the dates 
also of the warrants." ^ Whether Crawford had obtained from 
Lord Dunmore, before that date, any regular commission as sur- 
veyor for a district on the Ohio, is not clear. We know, however, 
that Lord Dunmore promised to serve Crawford in that way if it 
should be in his power,- and Crawford wrote to Washington, 
December 29, 1773, concerning this very matter; "If you can 
do any thing for me, pray do ; as it will then be in my power to 
be of service to you, and myself too, and our friends. "•' A few 
months previous to the above date, Washington had procured for 
Crawford the position of surveyor for the Ohio Land Company.'* 
Crawford seems to have been a very enterprising character. If 
he could have managed the patenting of the bounty-lands, he 
would doubtless have served himself, Washington, and "our 
friends" far more effectually than did Lord Dunmore.'' In a 

1 Washington-Crawford Letters, p. 59. As Washington did not go 
west in 1773, it is probable that he affixed the names of StoJjo,Vnnbraam, 
and the rest, to a plot that Crawford had sent him. 

2 Washington-Crawford Letters, pp. 89, 40. 

3 Washington-Crawford Letters, p. 39. 

4 Washington-Crawford Letters, p. 33. 

5 There are strong reasons for believing that Lord Dunmore and his 
Council were Jiiaterially interested not only in restraining the soldier's 
grants, but also in furthering the claims of certain land companies in 
which they had stock. Washington ascribes the backwardnc-^s of this 
Ht)norable Board, in recognizing the soldiers' claims, to " other causes " 
than m.ero lukewarmne.ss. (See Writings of Washington, II., j). 3(35) 



87 



letter to Wahington dated November 12, 1713, Crawford bints 
at taking up the entire two hundred thousand acres: " I wrote 
you," he says, "relating to the upper survey on the Great 
Kanawha. I think you have not apprehended me in what I 
wanted. There is the full quantity of land of two hundred 
thousand acres, and six hundred ooer and above." Batter- 
field says that Crawford's meaning at this point is not clear. At 
least the allusion to the two hundred thousand acres must have 
conveyed a tolerably clear concept to the speculative mind of 
Washington. 

If Washington really owned at one time, the above 28,400 
acres in addition to the 32,373 acres which we have previously 
accounted for, this amount, together with his 10,000 acres of 
unpatented surveys, would make a sum total of 70,773 acres of 
western land, which he aspired to control. Considering the fact 
that his own claim as an officer was for but five thousand acres 
and that only two hundred thousand could possibly be granted to 
the officers and soldiers, it would certainly appear as though 
Washington meant to secure tliB lion's share, which, considering 
the circumstances and Lord Dunmore's conduct, no one could 
truly begrudge that enterprising man who prevented Dunmore 
and his colleagues from buying up all the claims. Washington 
needs no defence but his own manly and straightforward state- 
ments to his friend George Mercer, concerning his efforts to 

It is stilted, as a notorious fact, in the famous Virginia Kemonstrance 
(see Hening, Virginia Statutes at Large, X , p. 558,) that Lord Dunmore 
was in league witli " men of great influence in some of the neighboring 
states," for the purpose of securing, under cover of purchase from 
the Indians, hirge tracts of country between the Ohio and Mississippi. 
By the allusion to "neighboring states," Maryland is aimed at, for Vir- 
ginians usually ascribed Maryland's zeal for the public good to the 
interested motives of individuals. Such hints recoil, however, upon 
Virginia without damage to Maryland, for the policy of all the smaller 
states and the sturdy persistance, as well as the united and thoroughly 
consistent action of Maryland, are not to be explained from the stand- 
point of individual interest. 



88 



secure the bounty-lands for the officers and soldiers. " The 
unequal interest and dispersed situation of the claimants," he 
says, " make a regular cooperation difficult. An undertaking of 
this kind cannot be conducted without a good deal of expense 
and trouble; and the doubt of obtaining the lands, after the 
utmost efforts, is such as to discourage the larger part of the 
claimants from lending assistance, whilst a few are obliged to 

tvade through every difficulty, or relinquish every hope 

What inducements have men to explore uninhabited wilds, but 
the prospect of getting good lands ? Would any man waste his 
time, expose his fortune, nay, life, in such a search, if he was to 
share the good and the bad with those that come after him ? 
Surely not."i 

It is necessary to add, moreover, in closing this long disquisi- 
tion on W^ashington's Land Speculations, which, after all, is not 
without its purpose iu our exposition of the material basis of the 
American Union, that the Father of his Country did not realize 
as much as he had expected from his investment of time and 
money. His experience with Western Land seems to have been 
like that of many speculators of our own day. In a letter to 
Presley Neville, in 1794, he says: "From a long experience of 
many years, I have found distant property in land more pregnant 
of perplexities than profit. I have therefore resolved to sell all I 
hold on the Western waters, if I can obtain the prices which E 
conceive their quality, their situation, and other advantages, 
would authorize me to expect." In this letter, Washington 
estimates some of his land at six dollars per acre, and other por- 
tions at four dollars. He says he once sold his 32,373 acres, on 
the Great Kanawha and Ohio rivers, for sixty-five thousand 
French crowns to " a French gentleman, who was very competent 
to the payment at the time the contract was made ; but, getting a 
little embarrassed in his finances by the revolution in his country, 
by mutual agreement the bargain was cancelled." Washington 

1 Writings of Wa-shingtoii, II., pp. oG5, 3GC. 



89 



declares also that he has lately been negotiating for the sale of 
his western property at three and one third dollars per acre.' 
But the lands on the Great Kanawha alone were afterwards 
sold, conditionally, for two hundred thousand dollars, as we 
learn from the schedule of property appended to Washington's 
will. " If the terms of that sale are not complied with," Wash- 
ington adds in a foot-note, "they [these lands] will command 
considerably more " A good idea of the vast extent of Washing- 
ton's investments in land may be obtained from an examination of 
this schedule,'- the details of which we have somewhat abridged. 
The schedule does not include the Mount Yernon estates which 
embraced six thousand acres, or the tracts on Little Hunting 
Creek and Four Mile Run, which, together, formed three 
thousand two hundred and twenty-seven acres ; this home-prop- 
erty, comprising in all 9,22t acres, was reserved in family estates 
for Bushrod Washington and others. The estimates of the value 
of the following parcels were made by Washington himself, in 
1799, and his heirs were directed to sell off this larger portion of 
his landed property. 

Lands in Yirginia. 



Loudoun County, Difficult Run, 
Loudoun and Fauquier, 
Berkeley, .... 

Frederic 

Hampshire, .... 
Gloucester, .... 
Nansemond, near Suffolk, 
Great Dismal Swamp, dividend thereof, 

Carried forward, 



Acres. 


Value. 


300 


$ 6,666 


3,366 


31,890 


22,286 


44,720 


571 


11,420 


240 


3,600 


400 


3,600 


373 


2,984 


[?] 


20,000 



27,486 $124,880 



1 Writings of Washington, XII., 318 or Appendix to the Washington- 
Crawford Letters, p. 82. 

2 Writings of Washington, I., pp. 581-2. 



90 



Brought forward, 

Lands on the Ohio. 

Round Bottom 

Little Kanawha, 

Sixteen miles lower down. 

Opposite Big Bent, .... 



Acres. Value. 

27,486 $124,880 



587 
2,314 
2,448 
4,395 



9,744 $97,440 
Lands on the Great Kanawha. 



Near the mouth, west, . 


, 10,990 


East side, above. 


. 7,276 


Mouth of Cole River, . 


. 2,000 


Opposite thereto, 


. 2,950 


Burning Spring, .... 


125 



23,341 $200,000 



Lands in Maryland. 



Charles County, 
Montgomery, 



600 
519 



3,600 

6,228 



1,119 $ 9,828 



Lands in Pennsylvania. 

Great Meadows, 234 1,404 

Lands in New York. 

Mohawk River, 1,000 6,000 

Lands in Northwest Territory. 

On Little Miami, ...... 3,051 15,255 

Carried forward, .... 65,975 $454,807 



91 



Acres. Value. 

Brought forward .... 65,975 $454,807 

Lands in Kentucky. 
Rough Creek 5,000 10,000 



Total, 


70,975 $464,807 


Lots in Washington, 


19,132 


" " Alexandria, . 


4,000 


" <' Winchester, . 


400 



$488,339 

Tiius, to say nothing of the Mount Vernon estates, of the lands 
that Washington had previously disposed of in the Mohawk 
valley,! and elsewhere, of the 28,400 acres at the mouth of the 
Little Kanawha,-^ of the 10,000 acres of unpatented surveys lost 
by the Revolution, or of Washington's share in the Great Dismal 
Swamp, thus we see, that he actually owned, in 1799, over 
70,000 acres of land, which he had originally secured for specula- 
tive purposes alone. 

These facts concerning the vast extent of Washington's landed 
interests are now for the first time brought into systematic shape 
and historic connection. They reveal the practical and intensely 
American spirit of the Father of our Country. It does not de- 
tract from Washington's true greatness for the world to know this 
material side of his character. On the contrary, it only exalts 
that heroic spirit which, in disaster, never faltered, and which, in 
success, would have no reward. To be sure, it brings Washing- 
ton nearer the level of humanity to know that he was endowed 
with the passions common to men, and that he was as diligent in 
business as he was fervent in his devotion to country. It may 
seem less ideal to view Washington as a man rather than as a 

1 Writings of Washington, I , p. 684. 

2 The claims of Stobo and Vaiibraam were really purchased by Wash- 
ington's London agent, as we have just ascertained from a note in 
Irving's Life of Washington, I., p. 369. 



92 



hero or statesman, but history deals with men and, before all 
things, with human realties. Man lives for himself, as well as in 
and for the State, and the distinction of individual from patriotic 
motives is one of the necessary tasks of historical investigation. 

II. 

Washington's Public Spirit in Opening a Channel of 
Trade between East and West. 

Public spirit and private enterprise are the leading traits of 
the American people. This dualism of character constitutes the 
healthful vigor of our state-life. The coexistence in George 
Washington of the most earnest zeal for the public good and of 
the most active spirit of business enterprise, is but the prototype 
of the life of our nation, for, as a distinguished jurist and political 
philosopher has well said, der Stat ist der Mann im Grossen 
{Vetat c^est Vhomme)A A proper balance between public and 
individual interests is the great problem of self government, but 
public good, and not the individual will, must be the determining 
power in this adjustment. When the commonwealth rises para- 
mount and supreme over such selfish strivings as those recorded 
in the history of the land-controversy, then does the true soul of 
State assert its sovereign will. Necessity is the supreme law of 
nations as well as of men, and it springs, sometimes, full-armed 
into being from the most material of human interests. The 
real essence of Political Sovereignty we cannot explain. As 
Shakespeare says: 

" There is a mystery 

in the soul of State, 
Wliich hath an operation more divine 
Than breath or pen can give expressurc to. "2 

1 J. C. Bluntschli: Lehre vom Modernen Stat, I., p. 25. Bluntschli 
is professor of public and international law at Heidelbere; and president 
de I'lmtitut de droit international, which liolds its yearly meetings in 
Belgium. 

2Troilus and Cressida, Act III., Scene 3. 



93 



Political Sovereignty has its prototype, however, in the public 
spirit and patriotism of the individual. Who can account for the 
generous nature of American citizens, or for that heroic spirit 
which sometimes creates whole armies of men, who are ready 
to sacrifice all their individual interests for some great cause ? 
Americans are said to be the most practical people in the world, 
and they probably are. We even call the State "a machine," 
although it may be doubted if any but Englishmen believe this 
political doctrine. Americans are far too practical to offer up 
their lives for the sake of a machine, or to drag a political jugger- 
naut for the privilege of being crushed by its wheels. Public 
good, however, takes precedence of individual happiness. The 
State is surely as noble as the patriotism which leads men to die 
for it. Although interest is, without doubt, the material basis of 
political society, as it is of human action, yet there is an interest 
in Man, as well as in the State, which transcends self-interest and 
all personal or material aims. It seldom finds perfect expression, 
either in Man or in the State, but it is the glory of human nature 
that self-interest sometimes does find a sovereign complement in 
a spirit of self-sacrifice for the common good and for the welfare of 
others. Such was the self-sacrificing devotion of George Wash- 
ington, when, at the outbreak of the Revolution, he received from 
Congress the commission of Commander-in-Chief of the American 
forces, and, standing in his place as member of the House from 
Virginia, uttered those memorable words : " I will enter upon the 
momentous duty, and exert every power I possess for the support 
of the glorious cause. But lest some unlucky event should hap- 
pen, unfavorable to my reputation, I beg it may be remembered 
by every gentleman in the room, that I this day declare, with the 
utmost sincerity, I do not think myself equal to the command I 
am honored with. As to pay, sir, I beg leave to assure the Con- 
gress that, as no pecuniary consideration could have tempted me 
to accept this arduous employment, at the expense of my domestic 
ease and happiness, I do not wish to make any profit from it. I 

13 



94 



will keep an exact account of my expenses. These I doubt not 
they will discharge, and that is all I desire." ^ 

Wasliington's patriotism in the defense of American liberty 
needs no eulogy. On the twenty-third of December, 1788, he 
tendered his resignation to Congress, then in session at Annapolis, 
in a speech which has an abiding fame, as that of the American 
Cincinnatus. Tliese are his concluding words: "Having now 
finished the work assigned me, I retire from the great theatre of 
action, and, bidding an affectionate farewell to this august body 
under whose orders I have so long acted, I here offer my com- 
mission, and take leave of all the employments of public life'."- 

But Washington's activity in the service of this country had 
but just begun. We refer not to his .subsequent career as Presi- 
dent of these United States, after the adoption of the present 
Constitution in 1788, but to his public spirit in opening up the 
Great West to trade and commerce, and in laying the basis for 
our nation's policy in the matter of internal improvements. This 
is a chapter in Washington's life that is not so well known. 
Materials for this subject were first collected by Mr. Andrew 
Stewart, member of Congress from Pennsylvania, in a Report on 
the "Chesapeake and Ohio Canal," in 182G.-' Some, but not all, 
of the Washington-documents pertaining to this matter were re- 
published by Sparks, in his edition of the Writings of Washington. 
Mr. John Pickell, formerly one of the Directors of the Chesa- 
peake and Ohio Canal Company, has worked over this material 
and compiled fresh facts from official sources in a valuable mono- 
graph called, "A new chapter in the Early Life of Washington 
in connection with the narrative history of the Potomac Com- 
pany."'* 

1 Writings of Washington, III., p. 1. Compare with letter to Mrs. 
Washington, III , pp. 2-3. 

2 Writings of Washington, VIII., p. 505. 

3 Reports of Committees of the House of Representatives, First Sessiin, 
Nineteenth Congress. Report No. 228. 

4 New York : D. Appleton & Co., 1856. 



95 



The connection of George Washington with schemes for open- 
ing communication between the Atlantic States and the Great 
West was broken by the Revolution. There is a report in 
George Washington's handwriting, dated as far baclv as 1754, 
stating the difficulties to be overcome in rendering the Potomac 
navigable. 1 This report was made by Washington on his return 
from a trip across the Alleghanies, as messenger from Governor 
Dinwiddie to the commandant of the French forces on the Ohio. 
Washington went up the Potomac to Will's creek,'- or Fort Cum- 
berland, and over the Alleghanies by the route which was after- 
wards taken by the unfortunate Braddock, in his expedition 
against the French and Indians, and which became known as 
Braddock's Road.-^ A route was afterwards mapped out by 
Washington, from Cumberland over the mountains to the You- 
ghiogheny river, which was destined to become the great avenue 
of travel and western migration. The construction of the Cum- 
berland turnpike was a national work.^ Indeed it was called the 
National Boad, an I it must be regarded as one of the direct 
results of that policy of internal improvement, which, as we shall 
see, originated with Washington. The historic outcome of the 
Cumberland turnpike is, however, the Conuellsville line, from 
Piitsl)uvgh to Cumberland, of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad. 

The spirit of history is the self-knowledge of the Present con- 
cerning its process of development from the Past There must be 
some germ for historical as well as for natural evolution. The 
Potomac sche.ne of George Washington contained, in germ, about 
all iliat the present generation (;ould re si)nal)!y lieuuind. lu c 

1 Sli'waft'.s Rupoi-t, \t 1. .Spark.- lias TMt r<-printed this document. 

2 VVasliini^ti'u's j .urnai of a t'Hir onlt tlie Alleghany Mountains, 
Writing?, II , )) i'l'. 

3Thi.s route was originally discovered by Indians in the the employ of 
Virginia and Pennsylvania traders. It was ^rst opened by the Ohio 
Company in 1753. See Writings. of Washington, II , p. 302 

4 rhe Cumberhi'iil Ruad \va- eompli>ted to Wh""ling in 182'^, at a eost 
of$l,70000U, Hiidri-th, History -.f ill- I .. I7c9-182l,; 111., 

p. 699. 



96 



letter to Thomas Johnson, i the first state-governor of Maryland, 
dated July 20, 1770, Washington suggests that the project of 
opening up the Potomac be " recommended to the public notice 
upon a more enlarged plan " [i. e. passage to Cumberland and 
connection, by portage, with Ohio waters] " as a means of 
becoming the channel of conveyance of the extensive and valua- 
ble trade of a rising empire. ^ 

1 Thomas Johnson, of Maryland, was the man who, in 1775, nomi- 
nated George Washington for the office of Commander-in-Chief of the 
American army. See Writings of Washington, III., p. 480 He was 
one of the committee of correspondence for Maryland, in 1775, Samuel 
Chase, Charles Carroll of CarroUton, Charles Carroll, harrister, and Wil- 
liam Paca, being among his colleagues. He was delegate to Congress 
from 1775-77, and Governor of Maryland from 1777-79. Lanman, in his 
Biograjiliical Annals of the Civil Government of the United States, is 
surely mistaken in saying that Johnson left Congress to raise a small 
army with which, as commander, he went to the assistance of Washing- 
ton in Netv England. Governor Johnson called out extra militia in 1777 
"to defend our liberties," but Washington left New England and re- 
treated from Long Island in 177G, the Maryland Line covering the 
retreat, after having saved Putnam's troops from destruction by charg- 
ing six times, with the bayonet, upon the left wing of the British army 
and by the sacrifice of five devoted companies, of whom Washington 
said: "My God ! what brave men must I this day lose! " Colonel Small- 
wood was the commander of these brave young men from Baltimore, 
although he did not take part in the engagement, being " absent on duty 
in New York." (Bancroft, IX., p. 88.) But though Governor Johnson 
did not go to Washington's relief, these two were ever the warmest 
friends, and, after the lievolution, often visited each other, now at Rose 
Hill, near Frederick, and now at Mount Vernon. Johnson was Justice of 
the Supreme Court of the United States from 1791-93, and, when Jeffer- 
son left the Cabinet, was invited by Washington to become Secretary of 
State, but declined, John Adams was once asked how it was that so 
many Southern men took part in the Revolution, and he replied, that, if 
it hadn't been for such men as Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, 
Samuel Chase, and Thomas Johnson, there never would have been any 
Revolution. See Lanman's Biogra])hical Annals, "Thomas Johnson." 

2 This letter to Thomas Johnson of Maryland is not to be found in 
Sparks' collection of the* AVritings of Washington but in Stewart's 
Report, pp. 27-29. The idea advanced is of colossal import and only 
the present generation can realize its full significance. 



97 



Here is tlie bahnbrechende Idee, whose resistless strength has 
opened up the vistas of our inland commerce, and whose colossal 
proportions are now revealed, not only in the Baltimore and Ohio, 
which is the direct historic outgrowth of the Potomac scheme, but 
in the whole system of communication between East and West. 
It is a surprising fact that George Washington not only first 
mapped out and recommended that line, which is now in very 
truth, " becoming the channel of conveyance of the extensive and 
valuable trade of a rising empire," but was also the first to pre- 
dict the commercial success of that route through the Mohawk 
valley, which was afterwards taken by the Erie Canal and the 
New York Central Rail Road. lie not only predicted the 
accomplishment of this line of communication with the West, but 
he actually explored it in person. Before he had repaired to 
Annapolis to resign his commission, and even before the terms of 
peace with Great Britain had been definitely arranged, Washing- 
ton was again turning his attention to the scheme of opening up 
the West to trade and commerce. He left his camp at New- 
burgh on the Hudson, and made, on horseback, an exploring 
expedition of nearly three weeks' duration through the State of 
New York. In a letter to the Marquis of Chastelleux, he gives 
an account of his trip: " I have lately made," he says, "a tour 
through the lakes George and Champlain, as far as Crown Point : 
then returning to Schenectady, I proceeded up the Mohawk river 
to Fort Schuyler ; crossed over the Wood creek which empties 
into the Oneida lake, and affords the water communication with 
Ontario. I then traversed the country to the head of the Eastern 
branch of the Susquehannah, and viewed the lake Otswego, and 
the portage between that lake and the Mohawk river, at Conajo- 
harie. Prompted by these actual observations, I could not help 
taking a more contemplative and extensive view of the vast inland 
navigation of these United States, and could not but be struck 
with the immense diffusion and importance of it ; and with the 
goodness of that Providence which has dealt his favors to us with 



98 



so profuse a hand. Would to God we may have wisdom 
enough to improve them ! I sliall not rest contented until 
I have explored the Western country, and traversed those lines 
(or a great part of them) which have given bounds to a new 
empire." ' 

After resigning his commission at Annapolis, Washington 
returned to Mount Vernon where he arrived the day before 
Christmas, 1783. "The scene is at last closed," he writes, four 
days afterwards, to Governor Clinton, of New York, who had 
accompanied Washington in his recent explorations, " I feel 
myself eased of a load of public care. I hope to spend the 
remainder of my days in cultivating the affections of good men, 
and in the practice of the domestic virtues."- But how impos- 
sible it was for Washington to continue a mere private citizen, 
on the banks of the Potomac, solacing himself with the tranquil 
enjoyments of home life, as he had promised himself and his 
friends, is evinced by a letter to Thomas Jefferson, the following 
spring, in which he returns with fresh zeal to the project of 
national improvement " How far, upon mature consideration," 
he says, "I may depart from the resolution I had formed, of 
living perfectly at my ease, exempt from every kind of responsi- 
bility, it is more than I can at present absolutely determine. . , . . 
The trouble, if my situation at the time would permit me, to 
engage in a work of this sort [the Potomac scheme] would be set 
at nought; and the immense advantages, which this country 
would derive from the measure, would be no small stin3ulus to the 
undertaking, if that undertaking could be made to comport with 
those ideas, and that line of conduct, with which I meant to glitle 
gently down the current of life, and it did not interfere with any 
other plan 1 might have in contemplation."'' The connection of 
this revival of public spirit with those recent explorations, with 

1 Stewart's Report, p. 2. Marsliall'.s Life of Wiishint^ton, V., p 9. 

2 Writing.s of Washington, IX., p. 1. 

3 Writings of Washington, IX., p. 32. 



99 



Governor Clinton,^ in the Mohawk valley is shown by this allu- 
sion : " I know the Yorkers will delay no time to remove every 
obstacle in the way of the other communication, so soon as the 
posts of Oswego and Niagara are surrendered." Washington 
requests, moreover, that Jefferson should confer with Thomas 
Johnson, formerly governor of Maryland, on this subject, as he 
had been a warm promoter of the Potomac scheme before the 
Revolution broke out. 

In the light of these suggestions, we are not surprised to find 
Washington soon actively engaged in furthering the enterprise 
for which, ten years before, he had enlisted the legislative sympa- 
thies of Virginia and had secured the hearty cooperation of Mr. 
Johnson of Maryland. Washington started on another tour to 
the west on the first of September, 1784, and was absent from 
home a little more than a month. His tour westward was less 
extensive than he had contemplated, - for the Indians were still 
dangerous, but he managed to traverse six hundred and eighty 
miles on horseback, and took careful notes in his journal of all 
conversations with the settlers and other persons who were ac- 
quainted with the facilities for communication between east and 
west. There is an interesting fac-simile, in Stewart's Report, of 
a map of the country between the waters of the Potomac and 
those of the Youghiogheny and Monongahela rivers, as sketched 



1 It is highly characteristic of these two public spirits that they took 
occasion to secure together 6,000 acres of land on tbe Mohawk river, 
(Montgomery County.) See Washington's will, Sparks, I., p. 584, note 
(o). From a letter to Clinton of November 25, 1784, it would appear 
that the two friends had talked of buying up Saratoga Springs ! Writings 
of Washington, IX., p. 70. 

2 Washington had intended to make a trip down the Ohio as far as the 
Great Kanawha, for the purpose of inspecting his lands in that region. 
We must not lose sight of Washington's business nature. "I am not 
going to explore the country, nor am I in search of fresh lands, but to 
secure what I have," writes he to Dr. Craik, Jul}' 10, 1784. But in this 
statement, Washington was not quite just towards his own motives, as 
events show. 



100 



Dy Washington in 1784. A new route of portage, which he desig- 
nates from Cumberland to the Youghiogheny, does not deviate 
materially from the line afterwards taken by the Great National 
Road. Washington employed men at his own expense to explore 
the different ways of communication, and, from their detailed 
reports ^ and his own experience, he arrived at the conclusion 
that there were two practicable routes - to the Ohio valley, the one 
over the mountains from Cumberland, via Wills Creek and Penn- 
sylvania, which is now the Connellsville branch of the Baltimore 
and Ohio, or the so-called Pittsburgh, Washington, and Balti- 
more railroad, and the other through the mountains from Cum- 
berland, along the upper Potomac, which is now the grand route 
to Wheeling and Parkersburgh, from which points the Baltimore 
and Ohio stretches its Briarean arms to the Lakes and to the 
Father of Waters. 

But we seek the beginning of all this. The first results of 
Washington's tour of exploration appear in a letter to Benjamin 
Harrison, Governor of Virginia, dated the tenth of October, 1784, 
which we must regard as a fresh Ausgangspunkt and the real 
historic beginning of the Potomac enterprise. With prophetic 
instinct, Washington seemed to realize the greatness of his 
scheme. " I shall take the liberty now, my dear Sir, to suggest 
a matter, which would (if I am not too short-sighted a politician) 
mark your administration as an important era in the annals of this 
country if it should be recommended by you and adopted by the 
Assembly."-' Washington then proceeds to support by facts 
what had long been his "decided opinion," that the shortest and 

1 Two of these reports are reprinted by Stewart and are not to be found 
in Sparks' collection of Letters to Washington. 

2 See report of the Marybind and Virginia commissioners in regard to 
extending the narigation of tlie Potomac and constructing two roads to 
the west, one througli Pennsylvania, the other " wholly through Virginia 
and Maryland," to Cheat river. Pickell, p. 45. Compare Washington's 
letter to Madison, December 28, 1784. Stewart's Report, p. 35. 

3 Writings of Washington, IX., p. 58. 



101 



least expensive route to the West was by way of the Potomac. 
He takes Detroit as the supposed point of departure of trade 
from the nortliwest territory, and shows that the Potomac con- 
nection is nearer tide-water than the St. Lawrence, by one liun- 
dred and sixty-eight miles, and nearer the West than the Hudson 
at Albany, by one hundred and seventy-six miles. Washington's 
calculation of distances, by way of Fort Pitt, a list which was 
appended to the above letter, is not reprinted in Sparks, but was 
copied by Stewart from the orignal manuscript, loaned him by 
General Mason of Virginia. ^ 

" Distances from Detroit to the several Atlantic sea ports. 

From Detroit, by the route through Fort Pitt and Fort Cumber- 
land : — 

Miles. 

To Alexandria, (or Washington City,) . . 607 

" Richmond, 840 

" Philadelphia, 745 

" Albany 943 

" New York, 1103 2" 

Washington points out to governor Harrison the prospect of 
Pennsylvania's opening up communication with Pittsburgh byway 
of the Susquehanna and Toby's Creek and then cutting a canal 
between the former and the Schuylkill river. He says " a people 
who are possessed of the spirit of commerce, who see and who 
will pursue their advantages, may achieve almost anything." 
That New York also would join in " smoothing the roads and 
paving ihe ways for the trade of the western world,'''' Washington 
clearly foresaw. On this point, he says, "no person, who knows 

1 See Stewart's Report, p. 2, or Pickell's History of the Potomac Com- 
pany, p. 174. 

2 Pittsburgh, the head of steamboat navigation on the Ohio, is now 
actually distant from New York by French Creek, Lake Erie, and 
the Erie Canal, 784 miles. From Pittsburgh to Washington, by the 
Chesapeake and Ohio (.'anal, it is 34C miles. 

14 



102 



tlie temper, ijenins, and policy of those people as well as I do, can 
liaibor the smallest doubt "i Wasliinj,4ou's language seems 
almost prophetic. 

The political importance of establishing commercial connections 
with the West seems to have impressed Washington most pro- 
foundly. He reminds Harrison how "the flanks and rear of the 
United Stales are possessed by other powers, and formidable ones 
too " [Spain and England.] He dwells upon the necessity of 
cementing all parts of the Union together by common interests. 
The Western States stand now, he says "upon a pivot." A 
touch would turn them. The stream of commerce would glide 
gently down the Mississippi uidess shorter and easier channels 
were made for it to the Atlantic seaports. Washington urges 
that commissioners be appointed to make a careful survey of the 
Potomac and James rivers to their respective sources and that 
a complete map of the whole country intervening between the 
seaboard, the Ohio waters, and the Great Lakes, be presented to 
the public. " These things being done," he says, " I shall be 
mistaken if prejudice does not yield to facts, jealousy to candor, 
and, finally, if reason and nature, thus aided, do not dictate what 
is right and proper to be done." 



1 "While advocating the Potomac route to a citizen of Maryland, Wash- 
ington declare.s with patriotic fervor : " I am not for discouraging the 
exertions of any state to draw the commerce of the western country to its 
seaports. The more communications we open to it, the closer we bind 
that rising world (for, indeed, it may be so called) to our interests, and 
the greater strength we shall acquire by it." (See Marshall's Life of 
Washington, V., p. 12.) 

To a member of Congress he expresses himself even more positively : 
" For my own part, 1 wish sincerely every door of that country [the 
West] may be sot wide open, and the commercial intercourse with it 
rendered as free and easy as possible. This, in my opinion, is the best, if 
rot the only cement, that can bind these People to us for any length of 
time ; and we shall be deficient in foresight and wisdom if we neglect the 
means of effecting it." 

Stewart's Report, p. 7. Neither of these passages are to be found in 
Sparks' collection of the Writings of Waslnngton. 



103 



This letter to governor Harrison was brought before the legis- 
lature of Virginia, and public spirit in. favor of the Potomac 
scheme was soon awakened. It became necessary to secure the 
cooperation of Maryland and a perfect harmony of legislative 
action on the part of both states in chartering the proposed com- 
pany. A deputation, consisting of General Washington, General 
Gates, and Colonel Blackburn, was accordingly sent by the 
Virginia legislature to Annapolis, in December 1784, where they 
were received with distinguished honors A delegation was 
straightway appointed by the legislature of Maryland to confer 
with the gentlemen from Virginia. Among the Maryland com- 
missioners was Charles Carroll of Carrollton, the man who was 
destined to see the historic development of that " enlarged plan," 
which Washington had so early recommended to Thomas Johnson 
of Maryland, for, on the fourth of July, 1828, this Nestor of 
American patriots, who had outlived all other signers of the 
Declaration of Independence, laid the first stone of the Baltimore 
and Ohio railroad.^ 

It is not our purpose to write another history of the Potomac 
Company. That work has been done by Pickell Our object is 
to show the public spirit and pioneer influence of George AVash- 
ington in opening a channel of trade between East and West. 
His suggestions were adopted by the commissioners; his views 
were embodied in their report to the legislatures of Maryland and 
Virginia; and this report was the basis of all subsequent legisla- 
tive action in regard to the proposed enterprise. Washington, 
moreover, introduced his plan to the notice of Congress, on ac- 
count of its political bearing in turning the channels of trade 

1 Charles Carroll of Carrollton was over ninety years old at the time 
the Baltimore and Ohio was founded. His speech to a friend on that 
occasion was not unworthy the beginning of railroad enterprise in this 
country: "I consider this among the most important acts of my life, 
second only to my signing the Dechiration of Independence, if even it be 
second to that." History and Description of the Baltimore and Ohio 
Railroad. By a Citizen of Baltimore. 1863, p. 20. 



104 



away from Spanisli and British influence. " Extend the naviga- 
tion of the eastern waters; " he writes to a member of Conj>:ress, 
"communicate them as near as possible with tliose whicli run 
westward — open those to the Ohio; open also such as extend 
from the Ohio toward Lake Erie, and we shall not only draw the 
produce of the western settlers, but the peltry and the fur-trade of 
the lakes to our ports ; thus adding an immense increase to our 
exports, and binding these people to us by a chain which can 
never he broken " ' This was the first suggestion to Congress of 
that policy of internal improvements, which, from the beginning of 
the National Road, in 1806, was followed up with considerable 
zeal, until General Jackson vetoed the Maysville Road, in 1829. 
The policy of Exploration and National Surveys, which our gov- 
ernment still adheres to, was likewise suggested by George Wash- 
ington, and that too in connection with the Poiomac scheme. - 

The public spirit of George Washington is strikingly manifest, 
not only in these pioneer efforts for the good of our nation, but in 
a project which is so nearly connected with the Potomac enter- 
prise, that we must not pass it by, although the limits of this paper 
will not allow us a special treatment of the subject. Before the 
organization of the Potomac Company, of which George Wash- 
ington became the first president in 1785, continuing in offifc 
until 1788,-' when he was elected president of the United States, 
the legislature of Virginia passed an act vesting George Wash- 
ington with one hundred and fifty shares in the proposed compa- 
nies for extending the navigation of the Potomac and James 

1 Miirshall's Life of Washington, Y., \^. 14. It is a mistake to suppose 
that Washington did not appreciate the importance of the Mississippi to 
the United States, and the true interests of the country in obtaining a free 
navigation of that river He saw that this would come in good time. 
See Letter to II H Lee, July 19, 1787. 

'■i See letter to Richard Henry Lee, President of Congress, 1784. 
Writings of Washington, IX., p. 80. 

•iThe second ]iresidi;nt of the Potomac Company was Tliomas Johnson 
of Maryland, the man to whom Washington addressed the letter of July 
20, 1770, suggesting "an enlarged ])lau " for the Potomac enterprise. 



105 



rivers. This was done by the State of Virginia, through their 
representatives, who desired to testify " their sense of the un- 
exampled merits of George Wasliington," and to-raake those great 
works for national improvement which were to be monuments to 
his glory, at the same time " monuments also of the gratitude of 
his country." 

Washington, although deeply sensible of the honor his country- 
men had shown him, felt himself much embarrassed by this sub- 
stantial token of their good will and affection, and consequently 
declined their offer, for he wished, he said, to have his future 
actions "free and independent as the air." In a letter to Benja- 
min Harrison, Governor of Virginia, Washington, after a grace- 
ful tribute to the generosity of his native state, thus declares his 
position : " Not content with the bare consciousness of my having, 
in all this navigation business, acted upon the clearest conviction 
of the political importance of the measure, I would wish that 
every individual who may hear that it was a favorite plan of mine, 
may know, also, that I had no other motive for promoting it, than 
the advantage of which I conceived it would be productive to the 
Union, and to this State in particular, by cementing the eastern 
and western territory together 

" How would this matter be viewed, then, by the eye of the 
world, and what would be the opinion of it, when it comes to be 
related, that George Washington has received twenty thousand 
dollars and five thousand pounds sterling of the public money as 
an interest therein ? Would not this, in the estimation of it, (if I 
am entitled to any merit for the part I have acted, and without it 
there is no foundation for the act), deprive me of the principal 
thing which is laudable in my conduct ?"i In a subsequent 
letter to Patrick Henry, Harrison's successor as governor of Vir- 
ginia, Washington speaks of his original determination to accept 

1 Pickell, p. 135, or Writings of Washington, IX., p. 84. Washing- 
ton's private opinion as to tlie etiect the Potomac enterprise would have 
in raising the value of his western hinds, may be gathered from a com- 
parison of his Writings, IX., pp. 31, 99. 



106 



no pay whatever for his public services : " When I was first called 
to the station with which I was honored during the late conflict 
for our liberties, to the diffidence which I had so many reasons to 
feel in accepting it, I thought it my duty to join a firm resolution 
to shut my hand against every pecuniary recompense. To this 
resolution I have invariably adhered, and from it, if I had the in- 
clination, I do not feel at liberty now to depart "i But, in view 
of the earnest wishes of Patrick Henry and the legislature of Vir- 
ginia, that Washington's name might be identified with this great 
scheme for public improvements, Washington finally consented to 
appropriate the shares, not to his own emolument, but for objects 
of a public nature. 

The shares that Washington received from the Potomac Com- 
pany seem to have constituted the material basis of his famous 
plan for a National University. An examination of his corres- 
pondence with Edmund Randolph and Thomas Jefferson, reveals 
the fact that Washington's original purpose was to appropriate 
the Potomac and James river stock for the establishment of two 
charity schools, one on each of the above rivers for the education 
and support of the children of those men who had fallen in the 
defence of American liberty.- Afterwards, however, believing 
the stock likely to prove extremely valuable, Washington deter- 
mined to employ the fifty shares, which he held in the Potomac 
Company, for the endowment of a National University, in the 
District of Columbia, "under the auspices of the general govern- 
ment." The one hundred shares which he held in the James 
River Company, were given to Liberty Hall Academy, in Vir- 
ginia, now the Washington and Lee University. Although 
Washington declared his conviction that it would be far better to 
concentrate all the shares upon the establishment of a National 
University, •' yet, from a desire to reconcile his gratitude to Vir- 

1 Pickell.p. 143. 

2 Writing.s of Washington, IX., pp. IIG, 134. 

3 Writings of Washington, XI., p. 24. 



107 

ginia with a great public good, he concluded to divide the bequest 
as above described. " I am disposed to believe," he writes to the 
governor and legislature of Virginia, "that a seminary of learning 
upon an enlarged plan, but yet not coming up to the full idea of 
a university, is an institution to be preferred for the position 
which is to be chosen. The students, who wish to pursue the 
whole range of science, may pass with advantage from the semi- 
nary to the University, and the former, by a due relation, may be 
rendered cooperative with the latter." ^ 

The project of a National University was the favorite scheme 
of Washington's old age. It was more than an " enlarged plan ; " 
it was a "full idea." In these days of striving for a broader 
knowledge of economic laws, for a better civil service, and for a 
thorough understanding of the principles of legislation, is it not well 
to consider for a moment Washington's plan for "the education 
of our youth in the science of government ? " Since it is purely 
a matter of fact that the most trusty and efficient servants, of 
whom this country can boast, are trained at a governmental 
institution, which was suggested by George Washington in a 
speech to Congress, as second only to a National University, it is 
not unlikely that there may be some essence of political wisdom 
even in the latter project. Washington said " the art of war is 
at once comprehensive and complicated; it demands much pre- 
vious study." The American people found out seme years ago, 
that Washington was right on that point, and they are now be- 
ginning to suspect, that even the art of government requires some 
previous study, and that, possibly, " a flourishing state of the arts 
and sciences contributes to national prosperity and reputation."^ 
Washington's letters, after 1794, are full of allusions to his new 
scheme, and he never tires of expatiating upon the advantages 
which would arise from a school of politics where the future guar- 

1 Writings of Washington, XL, p. 24. 

2 Speech of Washington to Congress, December 7, 1796. Writings of 
Washington, XII., p. 71. 



108 



dians of liberty mijrht receive their training. But there is a 
passage in Wasliington's last will and testament, which sums up his 
views upon this important matter : " It has always been a source 
of serious regret with me," he says, "to see the youth of these 
United States sent to foreign countries for the purpose of educa- 
tion, often before their minds were formed, or they had imbibed 
any adequate ideas of the happiness of their own ; contracting, 
too frequently, not only habits of dissipation and extravagance, 

but principles unfriendly to rejjublican government, 

which thereafter are rarely overcome ; for these reasons it has 
been my ardent wish to see a plan devised, on a liberal scale, 
which would have a tendency to spread systematic ideas through 
all parts of this rising empire, thereby to do away with local 
attachments and State prejudices, as far as the nature of things 
would, or indeed ought to admit, from our national councils. 
Looking anxiously forward to the accomplishment of so desirable 
an object as this is, (in my estimation), my mind has not been 
able to contemplate any plan more likely to effect the measure, 
than the establishment of a university in the central part of the 
United States, to which the youths of fortune and talents from all 
parts thereof may be sent for the completion of their education 
in all branches of polite literature, iu the arts and sciences, in 
acquiring knowledge in the principles of politics and good govern- 
ment." ^ .... 

It was reserved for later times to see the establishment, not far 
from the borders of the Potomac, midway between North and 
South, and under the very shadow of Washington's monument, of 
an institution, which, if not national in name, is national, nay 
cosmopolitan, in spirit, and is striving to realize "the full idea of 
a university." 

It remains now for us to point out the connecting links between 
the Past aud Present, between the pioneer schemes of George 

1 Writings of Washington, I., p. 571. See also XI., p. 3. 



109 



Washington, for opening up comninnication witli the Great West, 
and tlie raih'oad enterprise of to-day, wliich also is the outgrowth 
of public spirit, and not without its influence upon the develop- 
ment of this country or the permanent welfare of a republic of 
letters. The work of clearing the Potomac river from obstruc- 
tions was never fully carried out, and only one dividend was ever 
paid upon tlie stock invested. ^ But the Chesapeake and Ohio 
Canal Company took up the enterprise and have achieved success. 
There is now perfect communication from tide-water to Cumber- 
land, along the line of the Potomac, and Washington's scheme is 
thus far realized. According to a report made by the president 
of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company, in I85I, this work is 
considered "as merely carrying out in a more perfect form the 
design of General Washington, and as naturally resulting from 
the views and measures originally suggested and advocated by 
him." 2 

But the true historic outcome of Washington's pioneer scheme 
must be sought fur, not simjily in the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, 
which starting at Cumberland, brings down coal from the moun- 
tains to the sea, but in that " enlarged plan," which regards 
Cumberland, as Washington surely did, merely as a stepping- 
stone to intercourse with the Ohio Valley, the Great Lakes, and 
the Far West. It is interesting to note, that, when the hope of 
ever constructing a canal over the Alleghany mountains was given 
up, in 1826, in consequence of the report of the French engineers, 
who had been employed to survey the proposed routes, the Balti- 
more and Ohio railroad enterprise was undertaken, at the sugges- 

1 Report of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, 1851, p. 20. Washington 
had such confidence in the Potomac Company that he recommended his 
legatees to take each a share of the Potomac slock in his estate rather 
than the equivalent in money. He thought the income from tolls would 
be very large when navigation was once opened. The James River stock 
became productive in the course of a few years after Washington's death. 
AVritings of Washington. Note by Sparks, XI , p. 4. 

'■!■ Report on the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, 1851, p. 20. 

15 



110 



tion of Philip E. Thomas, who resipfncd his office as commissioner 
for Maryland in the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal project, and 
devoted himself, henceforth, to the task of winning' back for Balti- 
more the line of western trade, which had been diverted from the 
Cmuberland road by the Erie Canal, which was completed in 
1825. In a report on this subject to the enterprising spirits of 
Baltimore, by Mr. Thomas, on the nineteenth of February, 182Y, 
may be seen, not only the beginning of the first railroad enterprise 
in this country, 1 but also the revival of Washington's pioneer 
suggestions concerning the best route from the seaboard to the 
West. The following extract from this report has an historic 
significance which, has never been duly emphasized, or even placed 
in its proper connections: "Baltimore lies two hundred miles 
nearer to the navigable waters of the West than New York, and 
about one hundred miles nearer to them than Philadelphia: to 
which may be added the important fact, that the easiest, and by 
far the most practicable route through the ridge of mountains, 
which divide the Atlantic from the Western waters, is along the 
depression formed by the Potomac in its passage through them.^^ ^ 
Philip E. Thomas, a worthy successor of that enterprising spirit, 
Governor Johnson, of Maryland, who succeeded Washington as 
president of the Potomac Company, became the first president of 
the Baltimore and Ohio railroad. The legislature of Maryland 
voted the sum of $500,000, in 1828, for the encouragement of the 
work. This was the first legislative aid ever given in this country 

1 Three miles of trumway, constructed in 1827, from the granite quar- 
ries to the wharves at Quincy, Massachusetts, can hardly be called a rail- 
road enterprise, any more than can the quarry tramways of Enghind, 
which existed long before the opening of the lirst railroad in the world, 
from Manchester to Liverpool, in 1830, the .^ame year jis the opening of 
the Baltimore and Ohio, from this city to Ellicotts Alills, distant fourteen 
miles. A locomotive engine was, however, first used on the Quincy 
road, in 1829. The same was ini] orted from England, where they were 
just coming into use upon quarry-tram waj-s. 

2 History and Description of the Baltimore and Ohio Eail Road. By 
a Citizen (."f Baltimore. 18-33. p. 12. 



Ill 



to railroad enterprise. An appropriation of $1,000,000 was after- 
wards recommended for it by committees in both houses of Con- 
gress, but the bill failed to pass, owing to the opposition of 
General Mercer,^ president of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal 
Company and chairman of the committee on roads and canals. 
But' our Government detailed West Point graduates to aid in 
engineering this work, which has proved of truly national import- 
ance and a worthy outcome of the National Road. As this coun- 
try is indebted to George Washington for the suggestion of both 
this work and of a military academy, where engineers are trained 
for the public service, it would seem as though, in one way or 
another, all lines of public policy lead us back to Washington, as 
all roads lead to Rome. 

The connection of the Baltimore and Ohio with Washington's 
scheme for opening up the West to trade and commerce, cannot 
be disputed upon the ground that the application of steam revo- 
lutionized locomotion and the routes of travel. Steam had nothing 
whatever to do with the inception of the Baltimore and Ohio, for 
the first locomotive power employed on this road, the first division 
of which was opened in 1830, w^as horse power. The Liverpool 
and Manchester road was opened the same year, and locomotive 
engines soon came into general use, but, on the Baltimore and 
Ohio, cars were first drawn, like canal boats, by horses and mules. 
The transitiojjal character of this Baltimore enterprise is still 
further illustrated by the fact, that Evan Thomas rigged up a 
railway-car with sails, which was called the "Aeolus," and was 
pronounced a great success — on windy days. Baron Krudener, a 
Russian envoy to this country, about the time the experiment was 
made, was so delighted with the invention, that he said he would 
like to send over all his staff from Washington " to enjoy sailing 
on the railroad." The subsequent introduction of railways into 
Russia and the official patronage extended to Ross Winans, of 

1 Ilistory and Description of the Baltimore and Ohio lluilroad, p. 22 



112 



Baltimore, for liis mechanical inventions, are largely dne to the 
glowing accounts of American enterprise given by Baron Kru- 
dener, after his return to St. Petersburg. But Ross Winans' 
invention of powerful locomotives and friction-wheels, did not 
originate the Baltimore and Ohio. They were the result of pre- 
miums offered to the inventive genins of America by Philip E. 
Thomas and his colleagues. The opening of a railroad, or of 
some better means of communication with the West than portage 
over the Cumberland road, became a living necessity for the mer- 
chants of Baltimore after the Erie Canal had turned the current 
of western trade. It was positively a struggle for commercial 
existence. The construction of tramways, the use of horse power 
and of sails, and the final application of steam, and Ross Winans' 
inventions, were but a process of natural selection, and only the 
fittest has survived. But the historic germ of this wonderful evo- 
lution is Washington's pioneer scheme for opening up a channel 
of trade to the West by way of the Potomac. Of course external 
influeuce was necessary. The channels of enterprise must always 
be kept open, like the Suez Canal, by the constant effort of men. 
The original idea of Washington concerning the Potomac route 
has become an " enlarged plan." A road to the western waters 
is the leading idea, from first to last, in the Reports of the Balti- 
more and Ohio railroad. This was the thought of Philip E. 
Thomas, and it is the thought to-day, for there are still western 
xvaters. The completion of " the great national route " to the 
Mississippi, was announced in 1857, and, in that year, occurred 
one of the greatest railway celebrations ^ this country has ever 

IBook of Great Eailway Celebrations in 1857. By William Presoott 
Smith. On pages 215-16 there is an interesting speech, delivered by 
Mr. George Bancroft, at the celebration in Cincinnati. His glowing 
tribute to Baltimore must not be forgotten : " This great work is em- 
phatically the work of the City of Baltimore, and it may almost be said 
of Baltimore alone, for it was carried on without much favor from its 
own State, and sometimes in conflict with the rivalry of its neighbors. 
Hor is this all the marvel. The work in its completeness has cost more 



113 

witnessed, for three grand routes, the Baltimore and Ohio to 
Parkersburg, the Marietta and Cincinnati from Parkersburg, 
and the Ohio and Mississippi from Cincinnati to St. Louis, were 
simultaneously ended and formed into " a chain which can never 
be broken," as Washington once said of commercial enterprise 
between the East and West. The route which he suggested is 
now indeed " becoming the channel of the extensive and valuable 
trade of a rising empire " 

By the waters of the Potomac, near our Nation's Capitol, there 
stands an unfinished monument, which, for the credit of this coun- 
try, is sometimes so id to symbolize the incompleteness of Wash- 
ington's fame. All great facts in Washington's life are like an 
unfinished monument, if viewed in themselves alone, but the his- 
toric influence of great facts and grand ideas will flow on like the 
Potomac, ever widening in their course and deepening new chan- 
nels continually. The river of trade, which Washington sought 
to open, has now become a vast flood of commercial enterprise, 
seeking a quick way to the sea past the Monumental City, which 
in art, science, and the encouragement of public good, is more 
truly grateful to Washington's memory than the city which bears 
his name. 



than $31,000,000, itnd was entered upon with a brave heart and at a 
time when the real and personal property of Baltimore was less than 
$27,000,000. But Baltimore was always brave. In the gloomiest hour 
of the American Kevolution, her voice of patriotism was loud and clear — 
her conduct an example to sister cities; ani when has she been wanting 
to the cause of civil or religious freedom ? . . . She is called the Monu- 
mental City. Her column rises as a memorial of the Father of his coun- 
try; but this is her own monument. It spans the Alleghanies; it reaches 

from the waters of the Atlantic to the bosom of the Ohio We 

celebrate the opening of the direct communication between Baltimore, 
Cincinnati, and St. Louis. The occasion is one of great national interest. 
The system of roads binds indissolubly together the East and the West. 
.... How would Washington have exulted, could he but have seen 
his great and cherished idea of an international highway carried out with 
a perfection and convenience which surpassed the power of his century 
to imagine 1 " 



114 
III. 

The Maryland Instructions. 

"Iniilructioim of the General Assembly of Maryland, to George 
Plater, William Paca, William Carmichael, John Henry, 
James Forbes, and Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer, Esqrs:^ 

" Gentlemen, Having' conferred upon you a trust of the highest 
nature, it is evident we place great confidence in your integrity, 
abilities and zeal to promote the general welfare of the United 
States, and the particular interest of this state, where the latter 
is not incompatible with the former; but to add greater weight 
to your proceedings in Congress, and to take away all suspicion 
that the opinions you there deliver, and the votes you give, may 
be the mere opinions of individuals, and not resulting from your 
knowledge of the sense and deliberate judgment of the state you 
represent, we think it our duty to instruct you as followeth on the 
subject of the confederation, a subject in which, unfortunately, a 
supposed difference of interest has produced an almost equal divi- 
sion of sentiments among the several states composing the union: 
We say a supposed difference of interef^ts ; for, if local attach- 
ments and prejudices, and the avarice and ambition of individuals, 
would give way to the dictates of a sound policy, founded on the 
principles of justice, (and no other policy but what is founded on 
those immutable principles deserves to be called sound,) we flatter 
ourselves this apparent diversity of interests would soon vanish; 
and all the states would confederate on terms mutually advan- 
tageous to all ; for they would then perceive that no other con- 
federation than one so formed can be lasting. Although the 
pressure of immediate calamities, the dread of their continuance 
from the appearance of disunion, and some other peculiar circum- 
stances, may have induced some states to accede to the present 

iSce Journals of Congress, 111., pp. 1^81-3. 



115 



confederation, contrary to tlieir own interests and judgments, it 
requires no great share of foresight to predict, that when those 
causes cease to operate, the states which have thus acceded to 
the confederation will consider it as no longer binding, and will 
eagerly embrace the first occasion of asserting their just rights 
and securing their independence. Is it possible that those states, 
who are ambitiously grasping at territories, to which in our judg- 
ment they have not the least shadow of exclusive right, will use 
with greater moderation the increase of wealth and power derived 
from those territories, when acquired, than what they have dis- 
played in their endeavours to acquire them? we think not; we 
are convinced the same spirit which hath prompted them to inlist 
on a claim so extravagant, so repugnant to evei'y principle of 
justice, so incompatible with the general welfare of all the states, 
wmII urge them on to add oppression to injustice. If they should 
not be incited by a superiority of wealth and strength to oppress 
by open force their less wealthy and less powerful neighbours, yet 
the depopulation, and consequently the impoverishment of those 
states, will necessarily follow, which by an unfair construction of 
the confederation may be stripped of a common interest in, and 
the common benefits derivable from, the western country. Sup- 
j)Ose, for instance, Virginia indisputably possessed of the exten- 
sive and fertile country to which she has set up a claim, what 
would be the probable consequences to Maryland of such au 
undisturbed and undisputed possession ? they cannot escape the 
least discerning, 

" Yirginia, by selling on the most moderate terms a small pro- 
portion of the lands in question, would draw into her treasury 
vast sums of money, and in proportion to the sums arising from 
such sales, would be enabled to lessen her taxes : lands compara- 
tively cheap and taxes comparatively low, with the lands and 
taxes of an adjacent state, would quickly drain the state thus dis- 
advantageously circumstanced of its most useful inhabitants, its 
wealth ; and its consequence in the scale of the confederated 



116 



states would sink of course. A claim so injurious to more tlia 
one-half, if not to the whole of the United States, ought to be 
supported by the clearest evidence of the right. Yet what evi- 
dences of that right have been produced? what arguments alleged 
in support either of the evidence or the right; none that we have 
heard of deserving a serious refutation. 

" It has been said that some of the delegates of a neighbouring 
state have declared their opinion of the impracticability of gov- 
erning the extensive dominion claimed by that state : hence also 
the necessity was admitted of dividing its territory and erecting 
a new state, under the auspices and direction of the elder, from 
whom no doubt it would receive its form of government, to whom 
it would be bound by some alliance or confederacy, and by whose 
councils it would be influenced : such a measure, if ever attempted, 
would certainly be opposed by the other states, as inconsistent 
with the letter and spirit of the proposed confederation. Should 
it take place, by establishing a sub-confederacy, impei'ium in 
imperio, the state possessed of this extensive dominion must 
then either submit to all the inconveniences of an overgrown and 
unwieldy government, or suffer the authority of Congress to inter- 
pose at a future time, aud to lop off a part of its territory to be 
erected into a new and free state, and admitted into the coirfed- 
eration on such conditions as shall be settled by nine states. If 
it is necessary for the happiness and tranquillity of a state thus 
overgrown, that Congress should hereafter interfere and divide 
its territory ; why is the claim to that territory now made and so 
pertinaciously insisted on ? we can suggest to ourselves but two 
motives; either the declaration of relinquishing at some future 
period a portion of the country now contended for, was made to 
lull suspicion asleep, and to cover the designs of a secret ambition, 
or if the thought was seriously entertained, the lands are now 
claimed to reap an immediate profit from the sale. We are con- 
vinced policy and justice recpiire that a country unsettled at the 
commencement of this war, claimed by the British crown, and 



117 



ceded to it by the treaty of Paris, if wrested from the coniraon 
enemy by the blood and treasure of the thirteen states, should be 
considered as a common property, subject to be parcelled out by 
Congress into free, convenient and independent governments, in 
such manner and at such times as the wisdom of that assembly 
shall hereafter direct. Thus convinced, we should betray the 
trust reposed in us by our constituents, were we to authorize you 
to ratify on their behalf the confederation, unless it be farther 
explained: we have coolly and dispassionately considered the 
subject; we have weighed probable inconveniences and hardships 
against the sacrifice of just and essential rights ; and do instruct 
you not to agree to the confederation, unless an article or articles 
be added thereto in conformity with our declaration : should we 
succeed in obtaining such article or articles, then you are hereby 
fully empowered to accede to the confederation. 

"That these our sentiments respecting the confederation may be 
more publicly known and more explicitly and concisely declared, 
we have drawn up the annexed declaration, which we instruct you 
to lay before Congress, to have it printed, and to deliver to each 
of the delegates of the other states in Congress assembled, copies 
thereof, signed by yourselves or by such of you as may be present 
at the time of the delivery; to the intent and purpose that the 
copies aforesaid may be communicated to our brethren of the 
United States, and the contents of the said declaration taken into 
their serious and candid consideration. 

"Also we desire and instruct you to move at a proper time, that 
these instructions be read to Congress by their secretary, and 
entered on the journals of Congress. 

" We have spoken with freedom, as becomes freemen, and we 
sincerely wish that these our representations may make such an 
impression on that assembly as to induce them to make such 
addition to the articles of confederation as may bring about a 
permanent union. 

"A true copy from the proceedings of December 15, 1778. 

Test, T. DUCKETT, C. H. D." 

16 



118 

IV. 

Maryland's Accession to the Confederation. 

"An act to emporcer the Delegates of this State in Congress to 
subscribe and ratify the Articles of Confederation.^ 

" Whereas it hath been said tliat the common enemy is encour- 
aged by this state not acceding to the confederation, to hope that 
the union of the sister states may be dissolved ; and therefore 
prosecutes the war in expectation of an event so disgraceful to 
America; and our friends and illustrious ally are impressed with 
an idea that the common cause would be promoted by our form- 
ally acceding to the confederation : this general assembly, con- 
scious that this state hath, from the commencement of the war, 
strenuously exerted herself in the common cause, and fully satis- 
fied that if no formal confederation was to take place, it is the 
fixed determination of this state to continue her exertions to the 
utmost, agreeable to the faith pledged in the union; from an 
earnest desire to conciliate the affection of the sister states; to 
convince all the world of our unalterable resolution to support 
the independence of the United States, and the alliance with his 
most Christian majesty, and to destroy forever any apprehension 
of our friends, or hope in our enemies, of this state being again 
united to Great-Britain, 

" Be it enacted by the general assembly of Maryland, that the 
delegates of this state in Congress, or any two or three of them, 
shall be, and are hereby, empowered and required, on behalf of 
this state, to subscribe the articles of confederation and perpetual 
union between the states of New-Hampshire, Massachusetts-Bay, 
Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New- 
York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, 
North- Carolina, South-Carolina, and Georgia, signed in the gen- 

1 Journals of Congress, III., pp. 576-7. 



119 



eral Congress of the said states by the hon, Henry Laurens, esq. 
their then president, and laid before the legislature of this state 
to be ratified if approved. And that the said articles of confed- 
eration and perpetual union, so as aforesaid subscribed, shall 
henceforth be ratified and become conclusive as to this state, and 
obligatory thereon. And it is hereby declared, that, by acceding 
to the said confederation, this state doth not relinquish, or intend 
to relinquish, any right or Interest she hath, with the other united 
or confederated states, to the back country ; but claims the same 
as fully as was done by the legislature of this state, in their decla- 
ration, which stands entered on the journals of Congress; this 
state relying on the justice of the several states hereafter, as to 
the said claim made by this state. 

"And it is further declared, that no article in the said confed- 
eration, can or ought to bind this or any other state, to guarantee 
any exclusive claim of any particular state, to the soil of the said 
back lands, or any such claim of jurisdiction over the said lands 
or the inhabitants thereof. 

"By the House of Delegates, January 30th, 1781, read and 
assented to, By order, F. GREEN, Clerk. 

" By the Senate, February 2d, 1781. Read and assented to. 
By order, JAS. MACCUBBIX, Clerk. 

THO. S. LEE. (L. S.)" 



Pelatiah Webster's Yiews on our Territorial Common- 
wealth IN 1781. 

Pelatiah Webster was that " able though not conspicuous 
citizen," to whom Madison ascribes the credit of first publicly 
suggesting, that the Old Congress should call a Continental Con- 
vention, for the purpose of revising and enlarging congressional 



120 



powers. 1 Curtis, in his History of the Constitution, after quot- 
ing- Madison's statement concerning the i)ioneer character of 
Pelatiah Webster's pamphlet, published at the seat of Congress 
in May, 1781, simply remarks: "Recent researches have not 
added to our knowledge of this writer."-' Curtis makes no 
mention of Pelatiah Webster's " Political Essays on the Nature 
and Operation of Money, Public Finances, and other subjects," 
published during the American War and collected in 1701. A 
copy of this somewhat rare book has recently come into the 
possession of the author, and is found to contain, among other 
valuable papers, an essay on the Western Lands, first published 
in Philadelphia, April 25, 1781, not quite a month, therefore, 
after Maryland's Accession to the Confederation. Pelatiah 
Webster's views upon the subject of our Territorial Common- 
wealth are so strikingly similar to the ideas originally advanced 
by Maryland, that they will be read with interest, and are 
deserving of profound respect, for Pelatiah Webster seems to 
have been, not only an American type of Adam Smith, in ques- 
tions of political economy, but a power behind the scenes, in 
Philadelphia, the seat of the old Congress. In an essay, by 
Noah Webster, on the Origin of the Baidc, Pelatiah Webster is 
spoken of as " an old, intelligent merchant of Philadelphia, whose 
practical knowledge of money concerns gave him great influence, 
and whose opinions were often consulted by the gentlemen of 
Congress."^ 

Noah Webster, according to Madison, was one of the first to 
suggest a national government acting upon individuals; and it 
may yet appear that Pelatiah Webster had some hand in the in- 
tellectual frame-work of our Constitution, for his dissertation on 
the Political Union and Constitution of the Thirteen United 

1 Madison Papers, pp. 706-7. See also Note 172 by Madison's editor. 

2 History of the Constitution of the United States, I., p. 351. 

3 Collection of Pajjens on Political, Literary, and Moral Subjects. By 
Nouh Webster. New York, 1843, p. 1G3. 



121 



States of North America, first publislied at Philadelphia, in 1*183, 
must, at that time, have exercised considerable influence, and it 
is not altogether withont suggestive ideas, even for modern politi- 
cal reformers. 

The following brief selections from Pelatiah Webster's essay on 
Western Lands ^ will serve to indicate its scope and tenor: 
"The whole territory or extent of the Thirteen States is the 
ao-crreo-ate of them all, i. e., the territory or extent of each of the 
States added together, make the whole territory or extent of 
right and dominion of the United States ; and, of course, what- 
ever is comprehended within the boundaries of each State, now 
makes a part of our Commonwealth. This is to be considered 
as our present possession, our present decided right, which is 
guarantied to us by the treaty with France (Article XI.) together 
with ' any additions or conque.sts, which our Confederation may 
obtain during the war from any of the dominions now or hereto- 
fore possessed by Great Britain in North America.' .... 

" It is further to be noted here, that with respect to Virginia, 
and some other governments, which either never had any charters, 
or whose charters have been surrendered to the crown, that the 
soil and Jurisdiction of them were both in the crown, and there- 
fore the King ever claimed the right to make new grants of soil, 
and carve out and establish any new jurisdictions or governments 
which he thought expedient, and on this principle actually did 
carve Maryland and part of Pennsylcania out of Virginia ; how 
justly I am not to say; but this does not hinder Virginia from 
taking her departure from her eastern boundary on the sea-coast, 
and covering all the lands within her limits (not included in these 
carvatures) to her utmost western boundary. 

1 The exact title of this essay is " The Extent and Value of our Western 
unlocated Lands and the proper Method of disposing of them, so as to 
gain the greatest possible Advantage from them " It must be classed 
-with Thomas Paine's Public Good (1780) and with Plain Facts (1781) as 
constituting the chief pamphlet-literature, rehxting to the hind contro- 
versy. 



122 



" rt is, indeed, to be observed here, that ascertaining the 
boundaries of any State, does not prove the title or right of such 
Stale to all lands included within such boundaries. There is a 
distinction to be made between those lands which have been 
alieiialed by the crown, the title of which, at the date of our in- 
dependence, was not in the crown, but vested in particular per- 
sons, either sole or aggregate, and those which remained in the 
crown, the title of which the crown then held in right of its 
sovereignty, which was a right vested in the supreme authority, 
in nature of a trust for the use of the puljlic. 

" There is no doubt but every right and title of all persons and 
bodies politic are as eifectually secured and confirmed to the 
owners, to all intents and purposes, under the Commonwealth, as 
they were formerly under the crown ; but it cannot be admitted 
tliat any individual or bodies politic should acquire new rights 
by the Revolution, to which they were not entitled under the 
crown 

' Indeed, in all revolutions of government which have ever 
happened in Europe, and, perhaps, in the whole world, all crown- 
lands, jewels, and all other estate which belonged to the supreme 
power which lost the government, ever passed by the revolution 
into the supreme power which gained it 

" Nor can I see the least pretence of reason, why we should 
depart from a rule of right grounded on the most plain and 
natural fitness, adopted by every nation in the world under like 
circumstances, and justified and confirmed by the experience and 
sanction of ages. I think that nothing but our unacquaintedness 
with the heights to which we are risen, the high spliere in which 
we now move, and an incapacity of viewing and judging of things 
on a great scale, could give rise to so extravagant an idea, as that 
one State should be more entitled than another to the crown- 
lands, or any other property of the crown, which ever was in its 
nature public, and ought to continue so, or be disposed of for the 
use and benefit of the whole public community j or that one State 



123 



should acquire more right, or property, or estate than another, by 
that Revolution which was the joint act, procured and perfected 
by the joint effort and expense of the whole. We have too long 
and too ridiculously set up to be wiser than all the world besides, 
and too long refused to be instructed by the experience of other 
nations. "1 



1 Political Essays by Pelatiah Webster. Pbiladelpliia, 1791, pp. 485-90. 



^ 



TABLE TO APPENDIX. 



I. Washington's Land Speculations, 
II. Washington's Public Spirit in Opening a Chan 
NEL OF Trade between East and West, 

III. The Maryland Instructions, . . . 

IV. Maryland's Accession to the Confederation, 

V. Pelatiah Webster's Views on National Com 

MONWEALTH, 



Page. 

72 



92 
114 
118 

119 



LBilLT)7 



MARYLAND'S 

INFLXJENCE IN FOUNDING A 

National Commonwealth, 

O R T H K . 

History of the Accession ofPublic Lands 



By the Old Confederation. 




A Paper read before the Maryland Historical Society, 

A.pril 9, 1877. 
n Y 

HERBERT B. ADAMS, Ph. D., 

Fellow in History, Johns Hopkins Iniyersity. 



laltimop, 1877. 



/ 




